How Different Are the TR and the Critical Text? See for Yourself in English.

🌐 KJVParallelBible.org
🎁 Help me end Bible translation tribalism, one plow boy at a time:
✅ / mlward
✅ buymeacoffee.c...
📖 Check out my book, Authorized:
amzn.to/2r27Boz
🎥 Watch my Fifty False Friends in the KJV series on KZbin:
bit.ly/50False...
👏 Many thanks to Jonathan Burris of @pastorburris for editing this video as a volunteer support to my little ministry!
👏 Many, many thanks to the Patreon supporters who make my work possible!
James Duly, Robert Gifford, Lanny M Faulkner, Lucas Key, Dave Thawley, William McAuliff, Razgriz, James Goering, Eric Couture, Martyn Chamberlin, Edward Woods, Thomas Balzamo, Brent M Zenthoefer, Tyler Rolfe, Ruth Lammert, Gregory Nelson Chase, Ron Arduser, Caleb Farris, Dale Buchanan, Jess English, Aaron Spence, Orlando Vergel Jr., John Day, Joshua Bennett, K.Q.E.D., Brent Karding, Kofi Adu-Boahen, Steve McDowell, Kimberly Miller, A.A., James Allman, Steven McDougal, Henry Jordan, Nathan Howard, Rich Weatherly, Joshua Witt, Wade Huber, M.L., Brittany Fisher, Tim Gresham, Lucas Shannon, Easy_Peasy , Caleb Richardson, Jeremy Steinhart, Steve Groom, jac, Todd Bryant, Corey Henley, Jason Sykes, Larry Castle, Luke Burgess, Joel, Joshua Bolch, Kevin Moses, Tyler Harrison, Bryon Self, Angela Ruckman, Nathan N, Gen_Lee_Accepted , Bryan Wilson, David Peterson, Eric Mossman, Jeremiah Mays, Caleb Dugan, Donna Ward, DavidJamie Saxon, Omar Schrock, Philip Morgan, Brad Dixon, James D Leeper, M.A., Nate Patterson, Dennis Kendall, Michelle Lewis, Lewis Kiger, Dustin Burlet, Michael Butera, Reid Ferguson, Josiah R. Dennis, Miguel Lopez, CRB, D.R., Dean C Brown, Kalah Gonzalez, MICHAEL L DUNAVANT, Jonathon Clemens, Travis Manhart, Jess Mainous, Brownfell, Leah Uerkwitz, Joshua Barzon, Benjamin Randolph, Andrew Engelhart, Joe Siler, Mark Sarhan, Melissa F, Rachel Schoenberger.

[@adkDinoB]

I have bookmarked the site and will turn to it often in my studies. Thank you, thank you for the clarity this brings to the church, Mark.

[@wardonwords]

I'm honored! As is the team of volunteers who helped do the work!

[@bipslone8880]

@@wardonwords Why would you even care what Saul had to say, he never even met Jesus?

[@pg2269]

​@@bipslone8880 See Acts chapter 9. Saul's dramatic encounter with Jesus (v3-4) on the road to Damascus is one of the most famous stories of the New Testament. Keep reading and in v17 you will see he was filled with the Holy Spirit. In chapter 13, the Holy Spirit set Saul and Barnabas apart for His work which progressively comes to fruition, and Saul becoming known as the apostle to the Gentiles. However he typically took the message to the Jews first in each place he visited, and then took it to the Gentiles when rejected by the Synagogues.

[@LOTR_Speak_Friend]

Thank you, Mark! This video was very helpful because of your compassionate manner and scholastic insights. I hope the website of the KJV parallel bible continues to grow!

[@Jamie-jz2ol]

I recently started reading GW translation Bible. I have really been enjoying how it flows. I was brought up strict on the KJV only. Your videos are very helpful and are positively provoking my thoughts. Thank you and God bless.

[@CheriFields]

What a surprising conclusion to come to! As always, enjoy your thoughtful take on the issues, and it’s hard for me to imagine how much work it took to get to the point where you can share such useful info with us. I knew some differences were because of translation choices but had no idea how much of the variation stemmed from this rather than the underlying text. Thanks much

[@wardonwords]

Thank you kindly!

[@felixmarinjr.66]

This has to be the best presentations addressing issues between variants, textual differences between the TR, MT, CT I have heard. This really boost my confidence in reading various translations without having doubts and worries about which underlying text was used. Thank you so much for all your hard work. May God bless you for your work to help address the devisions doubts causes by these arguments.

[@wardonwords]

Thank you so much!

[@tiaanvanwyk101]

There are very serious "variants." These "Variants" not simple as names, means that there is not a steadfast Word of God. Lots have changed. Doctrines are touched. Some are removed. Do not be deceived.

[@Agben35]

Great stuff as always Mark. I saved the site onto my iPhone home screen only to see the link/icon already existed in my Bible Study area…. Time to get into it! Thanks!

[@wardonwords]

Enjoy!

[@Me2Lancer]

Thank you, Mark for comparing the TR & Critical Text. You did a great job of explaining nuances between them. Keep up the good work.

[@wardonwords]

Glad it was helpful!

[@dayetonlarson8477]

Thanks for making your hard work available to us "lay-people" who love the Word. I do use the various translations in their native "study-bible" formats and I've learned soooo much and now ~ more besides since I came in contact with your word. In following along with some of your examples... I found even more variances again! I was using the "Interlinear Bible" by Cambridge (with the Authorized Version / Revised Version) and the "Logos International Study Bible" with Variorum readings and renderings, etc, by Logos. Also the NET Bible. I am simply amazed at the dedication and hard work that was put into the translating of God's Word into English. Yes - I've learned so much and realize this is certainly an ongoing learning process and am enjoying every step of this journey in knowing God and His Word... Thanks so very much with God's abundant blessing being upon you and yours!

[@wardonwords]

Thank you!

[@stephenwright4973]

In all the Reformation doctrines about Scripture (its infallibility, perspicuity, supremacy, etc), I think more emphasis on the ROBUSTNESS of Scripture would be helpful. Indeed the Word of God is strong, "living and powerful," and His voice pierces through the inevitable fogs of textual transmissions and translations into foreign languages. Jesus promised us that the Spirit would abide with us forever, that He would guide us into all truth, and that He would take the things of Christ and show them to us. "My sheep know My voice, and they follow Me."

[@JJFrance]

PLEASE put out a purchasable format! You never know what's going to happen to online Bible resources and this is one I would love to have in my library, either print or epub!

[@wardonwords]

It’s coming!!

[@JJFrance]

@@wardonwords Fantastic! Will purchase for sure.

[@signpreach]

I appreciate your hard work in producing KJVparallelBible. Thank you

[@wardonwords]

Our pleasure (I say on behalf of the team of volunteers)!

[@vickyburton2434]

I adore the NASB and NKJV. It is so important to realize an English translation is still a translation. We must rely on the Holy Spirit for discernment and clarification. Thank you so much for your vlog. Blessings to you.💗💗💗

[@wardonwords]

Well said!

[@irataylor5083]

Absolutely!! Makes sense to me sistre Burton.

[@allangibson8494]

Then there are the deliberate mistranslations - like the eighth commandment in the KJV (which changed “thou shalt not steal the rewards of labour” to the shorter “thou shalt not steal” to avoid issues over slavery that the original commandment actually covered).

[@justmytwobits]

My favorites as well, NKJV and the NASB. I also like the NET Bible. Translation is good/different and the notes are outstanding regarding why words translated as such.

[@allangibson8494]

@@Nomad58 The LEGAL DEFINITION of slavery is not being adequately rewarded for labor (ie forced labor).

[@erichoehn8262]

Thanks so much for all of the hard work you have put into this brother

[@wardonwords]

My pleasure!

[@Australian_Made]

​@@wardonwords That guy who wrote in to the “ *TEAM OF VOLUNTEERS* ” should stick to proper English and not experiment with phases which he feels 'all the cool kids are saying'. The phrase is “ *old skool* ”, NOT old school. Perhaps he should stick to saying, "'great to see CT done in olden style'" or some other variant which avoids slang.

[@Australian_Made]

​@@wardonwords Yes, Thank You Very Much for *ALL* your dedication and tireless commitment. 💗

[@wardonwords]

​@@Australian_Made Thank you for the kind words! God is good!

[@davidgriffin6274]

Hello Mark. I love your work and the gracious spirit in which you engage the KJVO people. Say, I am working on a massive project in which I have compared Scrivener's TR with the NA 28 and underlined every single difference in both copies. I also assigned a corresponding number to each. Working 30 minutes a day, it took about a year and a half. That was "Phase One." In "Phase Two," I am typing each underlined difference into an Excel spreadsheet and providing short translations of each. The sheet has 4 additional columns in which I rate / rank each variant with a numerical value, evaluating each one on the basis of "type of variant," "impact on translation," "impact on meaning," and whether or not the NKJV ot the ESV reflect the difference. Excel spits out some really interesting numerical / percentage data from my number coding system. I am about a year into Phase Two with about three more years to go. Would love to share the details with you / compare notes if you'd be interested.

[@BioHazard74D]

Thank you, Mark! This is site is truly helpful and look forward to digging deeper into it in the future. Your third point echoes my recent feelings after reading Dave Brunn's book "One Bible, Many Versions" where he addresses how the common literal translations are not all that literal (compared to something like YLT) and the difficulties of Biblical translation in general. I finished the book feeling that my own struggles between TR/CT, and our vast selection of excellent versions, was extremely petty compared to those that none or even just one translation in their own language. As Dr Wallace says, it truly is an embarrassment of riches.

[@wardonwords]

RIGHT! I love this comment!

[@kirbysmith4135]

Dr. Ward, for us old timers who love our books, please do try to get this out in print. Thank you and Bless you for your work.

[@wardonwords]

Noted!

[@19king14]

Yep, I'm another one of those old timers who love the printed page. I will be among the first to get one!

[@4jgarner]

@@wardonwords this is an incredible resource! Would it be possible for you to work with someone to produce a similar resource in Spanish with the RVR1960?

[@travis2222]

Yes this would be a great in print!

[@jenihendrix3927]

I agree!!! Books please! When the world goes down the toilet we might not have internet.

[@conceptionproductions4649]

Thanks for all the work you do bro , it’s very helpful

[@wardonwords]

My pleasure!

[@dougbaker2755]

Thank you so much for your thoughtful and reasonable presentation. I became excited with this entire subject of textual criticism a few short years ago when a parishioner asked me a question that I could not answer at that time. I came to the same conclusion that you did regarding the differences & similarities between the TR and the CT--including leaning toward the CT. I also agree that Christians should not fight over this issue. By the way, my own analysis of Revelation confirms your suspicions that the number of variants between the CT & the TR in that NT book are greater in percentage than for any other NT book. Thanks again for your channel. I'm a subscriber and enjoy it immensely!

[@DonaldPotter_ReadingZone]

For 34 years, the KJV was my main Bible. I read the 1901 ASV some, but all my memory work was from the KJV. Then I switched completely to the NJKV. I consider it a great translation. With the textual critical notes in the margin, it is textually speaking the most scholarly translation. I was a student of Dr. Louis Foster, one of the NT translators for the NKJV. He showed me the Trinitarian Bible Society TR he was required to follow. Interestingly, he was also on the NIV translation team. After over 20 years studying and teaching from the NKJV, it dawned on me that I was forgetting the exact wording of the passages I had memorized in my younger days. I have returrned to reading, studying, and memorizing the KJV.. I also read Biblical Greek (LXX and Greek NT). You are absolutely correct about the textual variants being almost entirely irrelevant.

[@wardonwords]

✔ I think some ESV is getting mixed up in my KJV memory verses, too. 18 years on the KJV; 26 on the ESV (and other translations) so far!

[@christianacosta4922]

Thank you for advertising this remarkable Bible study tool. And thank you for your closing comments that affirmed Christians using Bibles from both the TR and CT. Since I’ve studied out the translation issue, I’ve wrestled with whether I need to “fully commit” to one camp or the other. I currently serve at a church that uses the NKJV, a TR-based translation. But I happily consult and study from CT-based Bibles as well. Do I need to choose? How long will I limp between two opinions? 😏 But your closing thoughts helped me see the value in holding on to both. For now, I’ll continue to study primarily from a TR Bible. But if the Lord ever opened the door to another ministry that used a CT Bible, I would have little to no trouble adjusting. I like that flexibility a lot.

[@wardonwords]

How can I lay any specific view on your conscience, brother, when the payoff is so little and-far more importantly-the Bible gives me no explicit direction? I don't think you have to commit to anything in this realm unless God says so.

[@kevinshort2230]

As a thought--working through variants is like working through other difficulties--perhaps the point is working through them is a meditative act. God didn't make it simple in all passages because theological engagement should be thought provoking.

[@kirbysmith4135]

Halt!, brother. 😉

[@perfidious333]

Translation - "I'm easily swayed."

[@pastorcoreyadams]

Great video and great resource, Mark. I have been on this site before, but never realized exactly how I could use it. Thanks for the explanation and I look forward to seeing it on Logos.

[@wardonwords]

Glad it was helpful!

[@AFrischPerspective]

What a an awesome resource this website is! Thank you, Mark, for your work on this and contribution for the edification of the church!

[@wardonwords]

It's my delight!

[@davidsteinart]

I really appreciate this. I started out reading the nasb and then was pulled to the King James buy some KJV only folks. Overtime I just began to realize that their claims of perfect inerrancy in that translation were not well supported and I started to see how much more effective it was to try to preach the gospel or minister to others in a language they understood. I really like how you point out that First Corinthian 14 teaches something must be intelligible in order to be edifying. That is pretty clear. Do you have any content related to the differences between the alexandrian Old Testament text and the masoretic text? God bless.

[@wardonwords]

Love this comment. I don't have any such content. I do plan to have some; I want to have John Meade on the channel. But I haven't gotten there yet. I'm a New Testament guy.

[@Naomi_OB]

This is a video i may share w the kjvo people in my life. Its been a struggle for years. Love the hard work you continue to do, to clarify an issue that need not divide faithful Christians

[@wardonwords]

I pray they will heed you!

[@RyanJeffries-cz3pq]

I really appreciate your graciousness and desire for believers to be confident in the word of God regardless of the underlying manuscript tradition. Thank you.

[@wardonwords]

Wow, thank you!

[@Aubstob]

I love my MEV bible because I prefer the TR but I've been using this since it released and as a textual nerd who (sadly) does not know Greek it has been helpful to see how similar the texts are!

[@clintbean]

I just ran across this video and the associated website -- thank you for putting all this together. I echo other sentiments about the need for other formats so we can use and share the content easily. (the website is easy to use though). I personally use Life Bible app for parallel Bible versions. Same goes for Olive Tree apps. Thanks again for your contribution and years of efforts. I pray it reaps great reward.

[@wardonwords]

It’s coming to print!

[@clintbean]

@@wardonwords oh, great!

[@povoq83]

Hi Mark, I just start to discover your amazing channel on YT. I'm from France and very passionate to understand and learn more about bible translations. I also work for a christian Bible mission. I was just having the project to make a video series on YT in Frensh to share some of my own research that is somewhat similar. I made a study of over 1000 differences I could find from various ressources. I compared 7 formal frensh Bible translations ranged from more TR to more CT Your project of your website is amazing but I was told that the NA28 is now slowly "getting back on track", and follows less the sinaiticus as before. The problem for me is not the NA28 (what seems to be your source for th CT), but the sinaitucus who is critisiced for probably more then 20 reasons. To my (small) knowledge the sinaiticus is the real reason for creating the extremism of KJVO on the opposite side and basically putting a halt to textual critisism because we no longuer have confidence in our scolars. -because of how they received the sinaiticus. It's a funny thing because Erasmus work from 1516 in some sense led to the reformation in 1517. The reformation is, among many other reasons, also due to Erasmus push to go back to the Bible : due to his work of textual critisism. (fun fact : I put "Anno 1516" on an official Lego set I designed and made a video about it) I would agree the KJVO went way too far and and you would have very reason to criticize them, but the problem isn't solved until we have more clarity on the sinaiticus's (and maybe vaticanus) origins. Getting to my research, I'm trying to get my own picture of how the texts could have changed in the early periods of transmission. Putting aside the conspiracy theories I came up with a new theory when I was studying the transmission of the coran. And I would very much like to have your thoughts on it. Is it possible that the manuscripts of the CT suffer from omissions simply because it has been orally transmitted ? I think an oral transmission could explain many many variants. It was way more common in these days and people could learn huge portions of texts by heart. Things like Christ-Jesus or Jesus-Christ is still a very unlikely error to make when you copy a text. But with oral transmission the text will easily fit the cultural ways of speaking. Same for the use of "him" or "he" instead of "Jesus". A very common difference. (Until 7 years ago I didn't really much had the courage to use the name of Jesus too often. I had to practice as I grew spiritually. I completely understand it would be left out more often in a oral transmission.) It also explains some of the portions that change places from one book to another. It's maybe not going to solve the whole debate. But if the sinaitucus is put in a position where it's still valuable, but not overwhelmingly valuable we get to a more common ground. Thanks for your great work and God bless you.

[@wardonwords]

Here's my thought on this: I've got a hundred projects going, and I don't know when I'll finish this one, but I have been working through the New Testament looking for places where Sinaiticus and Vaticanus are the only manuscripts being relied upon for a particular reading. In other words, how often do Sinaiticus and Vaticanus really make a difference? This is a bit hard to judge, because perhaps there are times when they lend weight to a reading that is found in other manuscripts. But I most definitely predict that when I get done with this work and actually show off all the places where Aleph and B (the short names of those manuscripts) make a difference, people will be very much underwhelmed. The difference they make will be comparatively small, and the differences themselves will be very obviously unimportant. That's my hypothesis, in any case. Have you read Dirk Jongkind on this? www.amazon.com/dp/1433564092?tag=3755-20 Or Peter Gurry and John Meade? www.amazon.com/dp/B0BG93WSDX?tag=3755-20

[@jamesbarksdale978]

Thanks for this, Mark. I've typically leaned towards the CT, but because of your videos and some discussions you've had with other folks, I've begun to take a closer look at the TR and the MT. I fully agree that the differences are minimal and theologically insignificant. So, why is everyone fighting? Let's stop straining at gnats, shall we? We have Good News to proclaim!

[@wardonwords]

Right! Minimal!

[@CornerTalker]

He states (around 6:10), that the Critical Text and the TR are the only two rivals - but isn't the NIV and the TNIV (Pretty widely accepted translations) both based upon Goodrick-Kohlenberger? Am I just confused on terms here (Critical Text ≠ Nestle-Alend)? Someone more knowledgeable than I please comment.

[@wardonwords]

There are multiple Textus Receptus editions, a number of which differ at least a little from each other. There are multiple critical text editions, a number of which differ at least a little from each other. GK is one of the latter. It reflects the text-critical decisions made by the NIV translators, just as Scrivener’s TR reflects the text-critical decisions made by the KJV translators. Does that help?

[@CornerTalker]

@@wardonwordsThanx

[@AvenueBCD]

Please put your parallel KJV into print form. I came from a KJVO background and left it 19 years ago after I began doing my own research after listening to an interview with Gail Riplinger that made no sense. Wow, did the research set me free!! Your parallel KJV is excellent for those of us who are not the greatest at reading Greek. I've learned a little as I've done my research but I can't read the Nestle-Aland and the Westcott-Hort texts because I'm not fluent in Greek. Thank for putting it online. I just found your videos and am glad to know of the KJV parallel.

[@wardonwords]

It's coming! It may take more than a year, but I doubt it will take two.

[@AvenueBCD]

@@wardonwords Mark, thank you so much! I can't wait!!

[@endoftheagereality]

Thanks again Mark for your commitment to Text type's and the humbleness in your presentation's thereof. I've been a Christian 44 year's and my calling puts me in the "exegesis and exposition" camp with a teaching ministry. I find much harmony with your balanced evaluations between the Text's, and because of this I would like your opinion surrounding a choice in translation of a word. In Paul's 2nd epistle to the Thessalonian's the 2nd chapter verse 2, the Critical Text translates "JESUS" name as "Lord," pertaining to the day thereof. In the Received Text it is translated "Christ," pertaining to the day thereof. Context and content of the chapter reveals the day in question is the "harpazo." Obviously these two days are not compatible. Co-text's abide elsewhere for further discussion ,but will leave it here and await your reply should you chose to do so. This being said Covenant blessings and will greet you here , there or in the air. Again thank you.

[@wardonwords]

This is a textual difference. The main TR vs. the main critical text. But I don't think this difference needs to be a difference in meaning, in reference. Check commentaries to see if they think so, but I doubt it.

[@MAMoreno]

Paul otherwise uses "Day of Christ" exclusively in Philippians, so the Received Text reading is possible but inconsistent with the terminology he had previously used in his correspondence with Thessalonica. In 1 Thessalonians, he uses the traditional "Day of the Lord" from the prophetic books, and the 2 Thessalonians passage would be his only other use of this specific phrasing if the Critical Text reading is correct. In the Corinthian letters, he speaks of the "Day of the Lord Jesus" or some variant thereof. Otherwise, it's simply "the Day" or "that Day" with no modifiers (except for one instance of "Day of Redemption" in Ephesians). He likely means the very same "day" that he mentioned in his Areopagus sermon from Acts 17, "a day in which [God] will judge the world in righteousness by the man whom he has ordained." Paul makes no clear effort to distinguish between these terms, nor does he treat them as separate from the "coming of our Lord Jesus Christ," which he refers to extensively in the Thessalonian letters and once in the first Corinthian letter. Paul never indicates that the "harpazo" is separate from the "parousia" or the "hemera." But it is worth noting that the two dispensationalist commentaries I checked (McGee's "Thru the Bible" and MacDonald's "Believer's Bible Commentary") both preferred the reading "Day of the Lord" because it corresponded better with their pre-tribulation rapture beliefs. So there is that.

[@endoftheagereality]

Mark, it would seem to me there is a great expositional difference between these passage's. Contextually it would be impossible to equate both reference's to one event. Clearly one is referencing the " harpazo" and the other the "day of Divine vengeance or wrath." But thanks for the reply. Looking forward to further " iron sharpening iron" with you.@@wardonwords

[@endoftheagereality]

Thanks for your reply. Would enjoy further discussion with you.@@MAMoreno

[@j.m.4314]

Praise God! Thank you for the hard work and love you put into this, brother Mark. I am grateful that this is made free to us. May the Lord continue to bless you and your team.

[@wardonwords]

You are very welcome!

[@Jolene03]

This is so cool!! How have i never heard of this before?! Thanks so much for making this available!

[@wardonwords]

You're very welcome!

[@JJFrance]

Thanks!

[@wardonwords]

Many thanks!

[@gregoryhoughtaling9879]

Awesome discussion. I must study more to have an intelligent question:)... now that I found your work I have more resources to learn. God bless you

[@wardonwords]

Glad it was helpful!

[@frimports]

What an awesome resource! Thank you for this.

[@wardonwords]

Glad you found it helpful!

[@bghvid]

Wow! This is so powerful and clarifying. Thank you so much for this great resource; it should be known both far and near.

[@wardonwords]

You are so welcome! This very week a publisher is considering a print version!

[@Wakingpunknovember]

Thank you for all the tedious work and scrutiny involved in providing this resource to the church.

[@michealferrell1677]

That’s it ! I’m KJB/NASB only :) Great job , you have helped me personally so much brother Mark .

[@wardonwords]

Great to hear!

[@kM-ij2ly]

NASB is corrupted to Just stick to the KJV and you are safe

[@austintucker394]

Personally I can see both sides of the debate. On one hand using manuscripts that omit certain verses and chapter because they might not be in originals isn't too different from how believers took out the apocrypha cause it wasn't originally considered Scripture. But on the other hand the manuscripts for the CT were found the same place as the gnostic gospels and writings, a group who would've had no problem with changing the Bible. So can see where both sides are coming from

[@wardonwords]

And the Bible doesn't address this matter explicitly, so you don't have to take a side! Of course, I wouldn't frame the matter the way you have. If the Gnostics had a crack at what ultimately became the critical text, they did a terrible, terrible job. And my site shows this. But I can't say it's a sin to see it the way you describe. I would say only not to cause division over this.

[@austintucker394]

@@wardonwords I don't I assure you. However, while I don't condem CT Bibles, ( after all the CT and TR are at best 99% the same and at worst 95% the same) never the less I think Bibles should be like the NASB 95, LSB, and HCSB in that they still have the TR verses and words but in brackets or like the NKJV in that it in the footnotes your told what verses are in the CT and which aren't. That why you can have the best of both

[@donclowers7666]

Thanks for posting this video! A resource like this is perfect for my level of biblical/textual knowledge.

[@wardonwords]

Glad to be of service!

[@coryc1904]

As a person with some mental illness and obsessive tendencies, I REALLY appreciate you demystifying this dichotomy between the TR and CT. This has helped me a ton. I now feel like I can just relax and know that "the Bible is the Bible" it's just really really wonderful to know that the Greek text is pretty much identical for the majority of it. This is such a relief to me, honestly. I've been spending a lot of energy and time trying to figure out this text versus that text, this interlinear vs that one, etc, and I've been second guessing myself and kind of making myself sick. But now I feel so happy and ready to just dive as deep as I can into my ESV/NA28 I just got from Amazon. I do think it's the very best interlinear I could have gotten, but I'm very very very relieved to know that none of the options are really THAT different. This is so awesome. Thanks a TON, Brother!!! I Love you. You are so smart and articulate, and keyed in to what is most interesting and important. You're so awesome. 💪🏻🐨❤️📚✝️ Thank you!

[@MatthewPatenaude]

Thanks for your video! When it comes out in Logos, I definitely want it, and please let us know when it's in print. 🙂

[@wardonwords]

I will announce both on my channel when the time comes!

[@MrPCApps]

What I would say I can not spill, I do hope you do get it printed. Thank you for your hard work!

[@wardonwords]

I hope so too!

[@woodbutcherjc]

Are there any updates as for as maybe getting it printed? I'd love to have one. God bless.

[@RelaxingBible]

Hi, this is excellent! I’ve been looking for something like this for ages. 🙂 T’would be great if you could make the link in description clickable. God bless!

[@justfollowjesus7216]

This has to be the best presentation I’ve ever heard on the issue of textual criticism. I’ve been TR for a bit now, but man this puts things in perspective and maybe lays the issue to rest for me. “Mint and cumin… a tempest in a small teapot” indeed. Thank you for your labors in the kingdom Mark. My wife and I will be moving to a town in Tennessee you soon that is very strong in their KJV ONLY beliefs. Having a resource like this, especially in booklet form, I believe will be extraordinarily helpful to pull people out of that religious trap from textual terrorists. God bless you.

[@wardonwords]

Thank you! This is very meaningful to me. I do indeed want to rescue people from the trap of KJV-Onlyism-and to help those Christians who in God's providence must attend KJV-Only churches to quietly, humbly weed out the silliness they hear and get only the good. MAKE SURE to listen to an even better presentation (I think!), the one given by my respected friend Darrel Post, on this channel: kzbin.info/www/bejne/i4TVg2dpo8ufhrc

[@allenfrisch]

Love this tool, Bro. Mark!! One of my favorite Bibles is the Byzantine Alexandrian Greek New Testament by C.W. Steinle. It accomplishes the same work you’ve done but in the original Koine Greek comparing the Stephanus TR from 1550 to the Nestle CT from 1904. I only wish we had a similar tool for comparing the Byzantine Text to the NA28! I also love your overall point regarding maintaining fellowship between the various text camps! My only small gripe is that you tend to rightly point out the bad behavior of the TR/KJV ONLY crowd but ignore or downplay the exact same hysteria I observe from many Critical Text proponents. Personally, I’ve always thought we should teach people to focus on the small number (7 or 8?) of significant passages that are up for debate rather than getting lost in the weeds concerning the numerous insignificant variants!

[@wardonwords]

Excellent comment. Will consider your point about bad behavior among CT proponents.

[@InkRavenLion]

I really want to buy this when it comes out. Right now I have a NKJV study bible and a text only NASB. Saving up for a NLT next.

[@TheRealRamora]

Really interesting video Mark, thanks, I bet that site took a few hours to put together so thanks for investing the time and making it available to us. Looking forward to when it hits Logos, if you could it would be good to know when this is so I can get a copy :-) Thanks. I am in a similar position to the guy who wrote to you in that I'm feeling both sides seem to be pushing how bad the other translation is while having no way to judge in validate what they are saying. I think a few hours in your site will be very useful so I can understand when people are talking from sense or prejudice,

[@wardonwords]

Right! I feel kind of alone in saying that the TR is not bad, even though the CT is superior.

[@danhanshew4957]

Ok, I am picky. I believe you said that Scrivener is the "basis" for the KJV & NKJV. I think (hope) you meant that Scrivener "represents" the Greek text of the KJV, etc.

[@wardonwords]

Oh yes, I do know this! I've discussed it in detail in other videos. It's so hard to speak succinctly about this topic! kzbin.info/www/bejne/p6nOhJycdqqYgpI

[@triciafriesen3693]

Wow! For someone who is just starting to get into Bible nerdiness, I am excited about this. Thank you!

[@wardonwords]

You are so welcome!

[@CalebRichardson]

Glad this is coming to Logos! I have an external link mapped to toolbar button now but it will be so useful to have it native.

[@wardonwords]

Gonna PM you with an idea!

[@rodneyjackson6181]

Great video Mark! I do not lean toward any manuscript family. I am very grateful we have all three families of Greek manuscripts in the Critical Text, Received Text and the Majority Text. In these three texts, we have God's Word. We are truly blessed. I personally like the NLT CT, NKJV TR and the WEB MT.

[@wardonwords]

Right! All are yours.

[@bmorgan595]

Thanks for doing this video Mark. I want to add something that might help someone out there. Scrolling through these tool pages does indeed point out the vast similarity between the two different texts. But what about when I compare two common English translations in Logos and see apparently many more differences than show up here...? This tool shows differences in the Greek texts, as they would be directly translated in English.....the differences we see between English translations demonstrate differences in translator choices...not necessarily the underlying Greek texts. Thanks again.

[@wardonwords]

If you see differences that can't be accounted for with the KJV Parallel Bible site, you are almost certainly dealing with differences of opinion on how best to translate the same Greek words.

[@philtheo]

On the one hand, I entirely agree with Mark Ward that the TR/MT vs. the CT debate is a tempest in a teapot. Like Ward, I'd happily rely on a modern English translation based on the TR/MT like the NKJV vs. my current favorites the ESV and CSB which are largely based on the CT. The NT has tremendous multiple attestation, whether one's English translation is primarily based on the TR/MT or the CT. And the differences are indeed minor. On the other hand, this can be a crucial issue for some Christians. What I mean is if a Christian ultimately believes their faith hinges on a particular text tradition like the TR or the Byzantine text type, if their faith in the Bible is so closely connected to faith in the TR and the KJV, then this could leave them open to a crisis of faith if they begin to significantly doubt the TR/KJV to such a degree that they begin to throw out their faith as they begin to throw out the TR/KJV. Of course, this need not happen, there are many Christians who lose faith in the TR without losing faith in the Bible, but I'm not referring to these latter Christians. Rather I'm speaking about those Christians who regard faith in the TR as tantamount to faith in God's word that it's an all-or-nothing mentality. They have the same or similar mentality to Bart Ehrman: an all-or-nothing mentality about textual variants, text types, and so on. It's a false dichotomy that need not be. (As a side note, I suppose this could happen with the CT too, but a key difference is most of those primiarly favor the CT likewise favor textual eclecticism, at least to my knowledge.)

[@wardonwords]

I do think we need to show special care for Christian consciences. But at the very least, the Bible needs to trump the conscience on translation. And let’s remember that a ton of KJVO consciences show no compunction telling other people their Bibles are corrupt and demonic.

[@philtheo]

@@wardonwordsDefinitely! Thanks for that. Perhaps I should've been clearer, but I was trying to suggest what you've just said far more succinctly than I could have, that ultimately "the Bible needs to trump the conscience on translation". I find many KJVO online with this all-or-nothing mentality that I find especially troubling since I see it could be a slippery slope toward apostasy (and not all slippery slopes are necessarily logically fallacious).

[@wardonwords]

@@philtheo Right! I see!

[@EstebanMoraes-d5u]

GENIUS!!! BRILLIANT!!! THIS VIDEO ENDS BIBLE TRANSLATION TRIBALISM!!! THANK YOU FOR YOUR WORK GOD BLESS YOU 🙌

[@wardonwords]

Wow, thank you!

[@joelrios4051]

This definitely needs to be in printed form, as well as an app!

[@wardonwords]

I hope it will be!

[@joelrios4051]

@@wardonwords I set up a shortcut on for the websit on my phone and was looking through it this morning. It's such a great tool!

[@randystrand908]

Refreshing, brother! THANK YOU!!! And of course to He Who inspired you...🙏👏👏👏

[@wardonwords]

I pray this project is a help to you.

[@mikefoht2738]

I am dealing with a friend of mine who went to Dr. Browns church in Wisconsin who is a KJV advocate. I told him the other day that the KJV translators used the dynamic equivalent technique in places after I heard it on one of your shows. Can you give me several examples of this? He wanted to see them.

[@Charleskasa]

Wow, this is amazing! Thank you! You know what would make it better? If you had a word count of the "variants" at the end of every chapter at the bottom of the page. Its been said that there are 400 000 variant for the NT alone, this would help solidify the fact that most of these variants mean nothing.

[@wardonwords]

A worthy idea!

[@curtis2600]

Thanks for this video it was very helpful. I have used Kjv for most of the 38 years and only used the different translation in study time but a number of years ago I started using NKJV and now am using LSB some. This was helpful in that I thought there was more Variances between the TR & CT so my hat off to you hard hard work. Ps I saw you were at the New River Gorge I grew up in West Virginia and I remember being there when it was being built keep up the great work

[@wardonwords]

Glad this was helpful for you!

[@jasonmcdade8837]

Wow! I appreciate your work and this helpful tool!

[@wardonwords]

You're very welcome!

[@jimyoung9262]

Wonderful. Thanks for your labors brother. The Lord bless you.

[@wardonwords]

You are very welcome!

[@zacharyj.5329]

What often goes unhighlighted is the remarkable similarity between scriptures from both the (TR and CT). Friends, the integrity of God's holy word remains intact! While it's easy to delve deep into scholarly discussions, let's not lose sight of the bigger picture. Whether it's the ESV, NASB, KJV, or NKJV, they all convey God's message faithfully! Rather than causing confusion by questioning the purity of the Bible, our energy should be directed towards sharing the gospel with a world in need. Let's not get overly consumed with debates that bear little fruit. Instead, let's reflect on the teachings of faith stalwarts. The emphasis should be on the essence of the message. Whether Bunyan and the Reformers leaned on the Geneva (TR) or contemporary preachers resonate with the ESV, NASB, both translations faithfully convey God's eternal truth! The distractions and rabbit trails frequently plant seeds of doubt, particularly among new believers who might question the infallibility of the Bible. As Spurgeon aptly noted, this is a concern that warrants our attention. It's crucial that we navigate our journey with discernment, avoiding unnecessary confusion. Let's remain focused on the true essence of faith. May God guide us with wisdom and clarity. God bless.

[@wardonwords]

Amen, brother!

[@jackelinegomez806]

Just wanted to say thank you for your excellent work and tremendous effort. We know that God is pleased when we make brothers and sisters come closer and understand each other better. You are furthering advancement of his kingdom.

[@wardonwords]

Wow, thank you!

[@rfranzq]

Two things that people do not seem to realize: 1. The TR is a critical text. Scrievners 1881 TR was the first time that the TR existed in printed form. And included an apparatus. 2. Everyone seems to think you are to unthinkingly use the text in a CT and not the apparatus to evaluate what text you will use. [If I am wrong on this, please correct me.]

[@wardonwords]

1. Yes! The TR is a critical text. Absolutely. It is a reconstruction. But no, Scrivener's TR was not the first time "the TR" existed in print form. That was in 1516, with the first edition of Erasmus' TR. Scrivener's TR, 1881, was the first time the textual-critical decisions of the KJV translators were ever represented in a printed edition of the Greek New Testament. 2. Yes, I think so. Anybody with a minimum of knowledge of NT textual criticism will recognize that the point of the apparatus is to inform the scholar's or translator's judgment, to enable him or her to disagree with the editors.

[@markwalker3484]

Great presentation as ever Mark, keep up the good work. From your occasionally critical Messianic brother.

[@wardonwords]

Thank you kindly!

[@ReghardBrits]

Thanks very much for this resource. It's amazing!

[@JJFrance]

God bless this important ministry. I would definitely buy an epub version of this.

[@NormanJones-o9x]

I would like to know if you have ever reviewed the Concordant Literal New Testament and what your thoughts are on it. Thank you for your consideration

[@wardonwords]

I have not, but I'm familiar with the concept. I believe it to be doing more harm than good. =| I just don't know who benefits from it. Certainly could be wrong! But in my experience, the only way to use the original languages well is to know them. And even that isn't a guarantee. =(

[@NormanJones-o9x]

Word comparisons can be made whether you know the language or not. It's fairly easy to tell if it's translation as opposed to interpretation. Seems to me you may be judging a book by its cover instead of investigating it. God bless you in your studies and remember the light of the Holy Spirit in confirming the word. Thank you for your service in the cause of Christ

[@davegarciaofficial]

Mark.. the one area I’m unclear on is it’s often the TR vs the CT discussions/debates. But we also know there’s a very significant MT as well. How come the MT readings aren’t considered or incorporated into the CT when they analyze and produce the CT?

[@wardonwords]

The CT considers all readings. In fact, MT readings are making a small comeback in the latest CT editions. But remember: we’re talking about minute differences most of the time.

[@davegarciaofficial]

@@wardonwordsahhh gotcha. Thanks!!

[@RelaxingBible]

Could Philippians 1:11 (mentioned here: 26:06) be distinguished by “which are” and “that is” (rather than “which” and “that”) to highlight the plural and singular Greek words? I don’t think “the fruit… that are” is as direct a translation as “the fruit… that is”. Just a thought. God bless!

[@OkieAllDay]

Doesn't the NKJV include these differences at the bottom of their Bibles? (Your website is a great resource either way)

[@wardonwords]

Yes, but a) not all the differences and b) the overall picture provided by the KJV Parallel Bible is more valuable than the NKJV footnotes (for this purpose) because the similarities and not just the differences are pictured.

[@thescarletandgrey2505]

Hello. This is such an excellent tool and you are to be highly commended for your work! I have recently been leaning more towards the ESV. Can you please tell me if the ESV is based at least in part on the TR and/or CT ? I have Googled and done due diligence but the answer tends to get jumbled up in the search results; for example I’ve found where they say it’s based on “recently published critical editions”, so, what were these editions themselves based on? Thank you

[@wardonwords]

The ESV is based on a critical edition of the Greek New Testament. It doesn’t perfectly match any critical edition, however. I don’t know of an English translation that does.

[@Quantum1008]

Your work on this is really great. For a while I have thought about how the difference between translations could come from either the manuscripts or from nearly stylistic differences. I wondered what a TR in the idiom of the ESV would look like or the Latin Vulgate in the idiom of the ESV. Thank you!

[@wardonwords]

Originally, about six or seven years ago, I thought about doing an ESV with the TR. Just figured it would be too hard to ask permission.

[@RWPeck]

Thank you Brother Mark for providing an amazing resource. I was recently propelled on a quest to get to the bottom of the KJV only debate - had no idea what all was behind that issue. This vide is one of the handful that helped me wrap my head around it and settle the matter. Textus Receptus or Critical Text? Yes please, I'll take both.

[@wardonwords]

Right!

[@JimDoubleYa]

For the sake of preservation, I hope that you're able to make this available in print. I would definitely buy a copy.

[@wardonwords]

I'm still waiting to hear from the publisher…

[@ZelosPhotizo]

1. I'm thinking why don't you put this in Logos, then a few minutes later you say it's going in Logos, hopefully the package I have (Diamond) will be enough? I'd like to hear more either way. 2. Print version, I'm on board with that! (can you dress it up with an actual Glossary, KJV Translators notes, Translators to the Readers, and any other relevant commentary you think is important? Hopefully many will find it a must have. Generally I've been wanting a Variant Study Bible anyway. (I should start making notes and requirements...) 3. I use the KJV, NKJV, NASB98 & LSB as my primary, I tend to think of things in the Byzantine/Alexandrian framework with the TR & CT respectively being the current backdrop for most of our language translations. Suffice to say, I really want to see more clarity come to this issue, hopefully resulting in less confusion around the Bible and it's validity. There's a long complicated conversation to be had here I'll avoid.

[@Pedro-bk1ic]

Hey this is pretty great. When comparing two different translations in English, it is difficult to discern between a difference based on translation philosophy or word choice and a translation difference based on difference in textual basis. Now we non-Greek nerds can look under the hood of the Bible a bit better.

[@wardonwords]

EXACTLY RIGHT!!

[@michaelkelleypoetry]

Even as a kid, I didn't think "begotten" was a very good way to describe Jesus in John 3:16. As a kid who loved to read, I could work out that "begotten" in the KJV in John 3:16 was related to "begat" in Matthew's genealogy, and I struggled to see how Jesus could be "begotten" by the Father in John 3:16, as it would imply procreation in the same sense as the genealogy, as if Jesus came into being at some point and was God's "son" in the sense that Hercules was Zeus's son. Now that I know Greek well enough to understand the Greek word _monogenēs_ and the debates on translation decisions, the NIV's translation "one and only" makes much more sense even though its more dynamic since the conjunction "and" isn't *_technically_* in the Greek.

[@19king14]

Here's some more on the Greek word for only-begotten "monogenes" from many orthodox sources. kzbin.info/www/bejne/pJ-noKR9q9FrsLM

[@bobbymichaels2]

The "man" Jesus did come into being at some point-when He (God) was born and became flesh.

[@19king14]

@@bobbymichaels2 Too many people (even scholars) totally ignore the fact that the definition "unique" or "one and only" for "monogenes" was completely fabricated in 1886. (See Wayne Grudem's "Systematic Theology" page 294.) They're trying to wipe out nearly 2000 of "begotten" history. Bibles prior to this had "only begotten" either in English or in their language equivalent.

[@ianholloway3778]

I have a French Bible which uses 'unique' which is an OK single word translation of the Greek word meaning something like 'one-of-a kind', a 'one-off' but 'one and only' is contextually a better way of expressing it in normal English, unless you consider that the Greek word itself has a different origin and therefore different meaning such that 'only begotten' is plausible but outside of KJV-exposed church environments (growing up preachers at my grandparents' church used the AV and NIV) I'm not sure 'begotten' and 'begat' are words used by many people in the UK and probably not at all by the younger generations. Nor do I know what modern expression would need to be used to convey that choice of Greek interpretation.

[@fraukeschmidt8364]

​@@ianholloway3778I think "only unique" or "one of a kind" is better than "one and only", since Jesus is not the only son of God (see Gen 6:1-4).

[@Kgosi503]

I proudly study both text in English language (NASB & KJV) and under no circumstances I try to use KJV to correct NASB or vice versa and thanks for this balanced presentation.

[@TechnoChris4591]

Brother Mark, thank you for this amazing tool and for the clarification that your work and this video brings to this issue. I am breathing a sigh of relief to know that I should be using both TR based and CT based Bibles in my study of God's word. Thanks again.

[@wardonwords]

Right! Or at least that you have that liberty!

[@tfleu725]

I just want to say - in the trenches of ministry life I am FAR more interested in having a reliable translation that the common man can understand than I am in arguing about the minutia of the TR or other texts. My church is very middle/lower class and we need to be able to communicate God’s Word clearly without the needless cloaking of biblical truth in archaic language. Do we not spit on the graves of the martyrs who died to give us the English Bible in a manner the “common plow boy” could understand when we cloak God’s Word in archaic language and confuse and frustrate the masses?

[@wardonwords]

Yes!!

[@charlesdoyle2161]

When you provide Revelation 21:24 as an example of the TR "smoothing the text," I'm still a little confused. Are you saying the KJV translators "added" English text for clarification or are you hypothesizing a reason why writers/copyists of certain manuscripts "added" Greek text? A look on my Blue Letter Bible, using the Interlinear function, suggests you may mean the latter, but I don't want to misunderstand. In any case, isn't it just simply an example of a variant? Thanks for this tool! I do use it from time to time!

[@wardonwords]

Good question! I'm talking about Greek here, not English. The KJV translators did not add English text, not to my knowledge. I am hypothesizing about why copyists of certain manuscripts "added" Greek text, for whatever reason-whether they pulled in a clarifying gloss from the margin of the text they were copying or what have you.

[@michaellaferriere4899]

Mark, thank you. That website is a great resource. Really appreciate it. I do have one comment regarding your statement that the Bible hasn't been perfectly preserved. When all the manuscripts are considered, we can be confident that we have every inspired word that the original contained. Among all the variants, one is the original. The historic Protestant position was that the apographs (copies) contain the pure word of God. What good is it to say (as many churches do) that the Bible is inspired "in the original manuscripts" when no one has seen them for centuries? I am not a TR or KJV onlyist, BTW. I am interested to hear your thoughts on this. I love your channel and your book. Thanks again.

[@wardonwords]

My friend, you are mixing talking points from the two camps. I am confident that all the words of God are preserved by the manuscript tradition of both testaments. Using all the evidence we can find the original. So I would not say that our lack of the originals means that we have nothing to value. Does that make sense?

[@KOYARTOS]

Thank you so much, Brother Mark, for your diligent and painstaking work in creating the website and Bible comparison tool. They are invaluable. I only wish that you had answered the question you pose in the title, "How Different Are the TR and the CT?", in terms of a percentage. For what percentage of the NT are the two editions in complete agreement? For what percentage do they differ? Do you give this statistic on your website? Do you provide other statistics as well? Let me hazard a guess: I going to say that the CT and the TR agree on 85% of the NT text and that in only 15% of the text are significant differences found. 85% and 15% give or take a few percentage points. What do you say, Mark?

[@wardonwords]

I have done this, and I will be putting this info into an upcoming book. The best answer is probably between 95and 97% the same. I checked with a statistics expert on the best way to come up with number. However, statistics don't tell you how different the two texts are *in meaning.* Sprinkle a bunch of "nots" in a text, and you can reverse the meaning while still having only a tiny percentage of differences in words. The only way to see how different they are in meaning, if you don't read Greek, is to laboriously compare them on my site.

[@SchrodingersCoin]

I hope a print edition does become available.

[@wardonwords]

It's looking likely! Not certain.

[@kienanmaxfield6288]

I would buy several if it came to print. Let us know if there are advancements as far as this! Thanks!!

[@snaify]

Happy to be an Honorary Bible Nerd! Thanks! This is awesome!

[@wardonwords]

Welcome aboard!

[@snaify]

@@wardonwords Thank you!

[@cwilson0713]

Thank you for being so clear! Great video!

[@wardonwords]

Glad it was helpful!

[@alanr745]

Excellent work Mark. I really appreciate the spirit with which you communicate this unnecessarily heated debate. Now, since you did this, could you please tackle the differences between the Masoretic Text and the Septuagint? As someone who studies the whole Bible and noticed how much certain NT quotes either did not match, or are removed from, the MT, I would love to see someone do this in English for the lay people who are adamant Bible Nerds.

[@wardonwords]

This is tough. A worthy subject for videos. John Meade is someone I might turn to to help us here. Maybe an interview.

[@Czasy_Końca]

SO what is better Textus Receptus or Critical Text ?

[@wardonwords]

For the purposes of this channel, I don’t care. Both are worthy choices. They are very similar. The differences aren’t worth a fight. What matters is reading the Bible in a language, you can understand. There are many TR editions and many critical editions. All the options I know of are good.

[@Tommytoolsqueezer]

Thank you for research! I have a beautiful black leather NJKV. I love it. Ps. Your voice is relaxing haha

[@RevAlexWilcox]

Bro. Mark, Do you have a video describing WHY you prefer the CT over the TR?

[@wardonwords]

No, because I truly don't care to persuade others to my viewpoint-not given my overall mission and audience. But it boils down to this: I have a stronger belief in the value of God's preservation than KJV-Onlyists do. I think we ought to take into account every manuscript of the Greek New Testament that God has preserved, not just the ones that happened to be on hand when Erasmus decided to publish a revision of the Vulgate.

[@RevAlexWilcox]

Yes sir. I was just curious. I made the MEV my daily reader a few years ago.

[@tedwilliams7198]

I asked the Holy Spirit to lead me to the right Bible Translation, I never heard of you and I do not know how God led me to your expertise in Bible Translations, CT, and TR All I can say is Thank You Mark Ward and to God be the Glory………I feel abbsolutely free in this area now !

[@wardonwords]

Wonderful!

[@tedwilliams7198]

​@@cranmer1959 There were many Bibles that came before the King James Version and we know that the King James "Version" took from those Versions.....The Pilgrims csme to America with the Geneva Bible....Not the KJV.....However the KJV is a good version and may you be blessed studying God's Word

[@tedwilliams7198]

@@cranmer1959 After a year of studying different Bible Translations before knowing about Dr. Ward…..I found that There is “Only” one Bible with many translations….and Yes Dr. Ward is my go to now ……He is a truthteller with God-given wisdom and He researches and studies like this guy who played on the Lakers called “The Mamba” played basketball. Every single Bible version points to Jesus as the author and finisher of our Faith, His death, burial, and resurrection. They “All” say that Jesus IS God……I mean every fundamental Christian teaching is taught in every version….except of course the Jehovah’s Witness Bible, and the Mormon Bible.

[@tedwilliams7198]

@@cranmer1959 I never said I followed Him, I said he is a great go to source……….I thought I made that clear……..

[@tedwilliams7198]

@@cranmer1959 Why do some christians make things so difficult to other people or new people to the faith…..Jesus is BOTH…He is the Great “I AM” I could ask you a plethora of things also…What is the Hypostatic Union in Isaiah 9:6…..So what ! You keep it simple…..Almighty God loved us so much, He sent His Son Jesus to die in our stead, He was born of the Virgin Mary, We believe in His death,burial, and resurrection, He is the Son of God , who IS God, He is our Savior and our God…..and He gave us a beautiful treasure trove of beautiful translations and Loves us with His AGAPE love and will never stop loving us….The King James version is a good “Translation” If you prefer that….Study and read from that translation; What I do know is that you can read any translation you want, however if you do not grow in love,in the fruit of the Holy Spirit--The version you read is of NO effect. Do I go to chuch on Saturday or Sunday…Soooooo what I know some people who go on Wednesdays and never go on Saturday or Sunday…Encourage people to Study and read the word of God…..And Father God who is Faithful and True will guide them individually. Christians even debate taking communion….One says I take it once per month, another says I take it everyday, another says I take it twice per year---They are all correct in what they choose to do--Keep it simple and Be thankful……and if they ask difficult questions then be ready to answer.

[@john-jkl]

Thank you so much for creating that site. I've had to deal with the KJV only issue before and have done some of my own work on several of the falsehoods, misrepresentations, and abject nonsense put forth by the KJV only crowd. This site will be a tremendous resource to share with others. I share your concern for the needless divisions that this issue causes. Thanks again! By the way, have you seen the KJVER edition? (KJV - Easy Read) - it's the KJV translation, but with very slight modernization.

[@SAY.8.18]

Thank you so much. What a great resource! Spurgeon said, and I, in variance, paraphrase, "All Scripture, honestly translated, is worthwhile." Go 80's Lakers!

[@wardonwords]

I tended to favor the Bulls at the time, but for no good reason other than that Jordan was more famous (to me) than Johnson!

[@SAY.8.18]

Jordan or Magic, Lakers or Bulls, regardless, seriously, thanks for creating the KJV Parallel website. Outstanding resource.

[@sdhute]

My pastor preaches from the NKJV however my NASB2020 is very very similar almost word for word. When I used the ESV it was not as close as the NNJV.

[@wardonwords]

✔

[@scripturial]

I don't know any other site that does this comparison so well. (Not just from a technical perspective, but also it looks nice as well). And yes, ultimately its good to be familiar with both the TR and Critical texts, lets not be ignorant of the differences and why they exist.

[@wardonwords]

Many thanks!