How Do We Know When a KJV Word Is Archaic?

[@TheChaplain007]

I am a KJV onlyist....or rather I thought I was (if that makes sense). The honest truth is that I am KJV preferred. It's what I grew up learning from, and it's comfortable to me. Saying that, I am not against some of the other english translations. They do help clear up some of the more difficult passages of the KJV. I have been pouring over your videos, learning so much. Thank you so much, brother , for doing all this. I am hopeful I may get my KJV onlyist brothers and sisters to open their eyes and see that updating words isn't changing the word of GOD. Thank you again

[@markwardonwords]

Right!! Thank you! This means a lot! I just want people to understand their Bibles.

[@TheChaplain007]

@markwardonwords You are appreciated brother, stay strong. If I ever meet you, I will have to get you to sign your book...which I just bought LoL. Blessings

[@loveisall5520]

I assume you mean 'poring over' rather than "pouring over", unless you are mixing and dispensing liquid refreshment over Mark's videos.

[@TheChaplain007]

@@loveisall5520 is that a false friend you just brought up? 😆 😂 I will let it stand as it is . The understanding is there evening with the bad spelling

[@annagaiser5186]

@@loveisall5520 Wow! I learn so much from this channel! I had no idea (until you caused me to look it up just now) that there was a verb "pore". Thank you.

[@salvadaXgracia]

Your videos are prime examples of why Bible translation updates are needed on a regular basis. We should update them while we still have elders who understand the older words within their living memory. We shouldn't wait until literally no one nor their great-grandparents understood multiple words and verses, and the wrong meaning and interpretation has already been passed down for generations. Thanks for your work on this! God bless!

[@BloodBoughtMinistries]

Not on a regular basis. Maybe every 50 years

[@salvadaXgracia]

@@BloodBoughtMinistries that is a regular basis. 😄

[@MAMoreno]

@@BloodBoughtMinistries Yeah, that's a good number. The RSV came out about 50 years after the ASV, and the ESV came out about 50 years after the RSV. That amount of time feels about right.

[@jennynolan7452]

Thanks for this. Our family just left a small independent Baptist church over this issue. We were unable to become members because we would not sign the handbook stating that the 1611 authorized KJV is the one true word of God. It's heartbreaking that our fellow brothers and sisters in Christ are causing division over this issue. It's legalism.

[@markwardonwords]

It is, it's heartbreaking. The division, the anger, the victimized plowboys.

[@timwildsmith]

That point about the transcript made we chuckle... so good, Mark.

[@markwardonwords]

Thank you, Tim!

[@missinglink_eth]

The dead words aren’t even the scary words. You can look those up. False friends are the scary words for proper understanding!

[@GJP1169]

Now I know what the word besom means . To be honest I never heard this word in my entire life.

[@le_ciel_bleu02]

I enjoy many Bible translations. I probably own 20 different Bible translations. (I'll have to make a count.) The New English Bible, The Jerusalem Bible, the NKJV, etc. I would add that if one studies and learns French, inferring the meanings of archaic words in Shakespeare and the KJV is much easier. Here is what chatGPT says on this point: "Knowledge of French can potentially help someone infer the meanings of archaic words in Shakespeare and the King James Bible. This is because French is a Romance language that shares roots with English, and many words in early modern English (the language of Shakespeare and the King James Bible) have French origins. *Understanding French vocabulary and grammar can provide insight into the meanings of unfamiliar words and help make connections between related terms in both languages.* Additionally, knowing French can help with recognizing cognates, or words that have similar forms and meanings in both languages, which can aid in deciphering the meanings of archaic words." Here's an example: Shakespeare writes: “I pray thee, bear my former answer back. Bid them achieve me, and then sell my bones. Good God, why should they mock poor fellows thus?” What does "achieve me" mean? Well, in French, _achever_ means "to finish." In English, in a karate movie, someone shouting, "Finish him!" carries the same kind of meaning.

[@dustinsegers4534]

And the title of this video is exactly why I don’t use the KJV anymore. Too many “false friends.”

[@ilovecats9336]

I didn’t know what besom meant, until today. I used the KJV for 12 years!

[@markwardonwords]

Join the club!

[@salvadaXgracia]

I would have no idea what besom meant if not for your videos! Never heard it for my prior 34 years of life, and would not have understood it from the context of the given verse. I probably would have assumed it meant swept away by the wind or fire and brimstone or something. 😆

[@bman5257]

I don’t understand the absurdity in trying to argue that an archaic word is not actually archaic. Isn’t that like a self evident truth, what words we use and don’t use?

[@markwardonwords]

Yes. I agree.

[@Matthew-307]

It’s the cognitive dissonance.

[@salvadaXgracia]

Yes. One wonders what he believes the definition of "archaic" to be. Maybe he should look it up in the dictionary. 😜😆

[@Yesica1993]

@@salvadaXgracia Ha!

[@vanuaturly]

I am familiar with the word besom. Not because I'm a native English speaker. Not because I've studied English and Middle English at a college level. Only because I have a specific interest in the history of archaic tool words. AI might not have picked up on besom because you are both mispronouncing it. It's "Beh-zum". This is a pretty good point towards it being so archaic that it's no longer a part of English.

[@vanuaturly]

Also, besoms aren't associated with witches, witches are associated with poverty. Besoms are always home-made. They are for coarse work, more like a rake than something you would use in a modern house.

[@dustinburlet7249]

Loved this video (as always!) Your comment concerning the Latin Vulgate was perfect! Well done Also, it might perhaps be of note that in Canada if it ain't Alberta it ain't beef (and that cattle always grow better in the shade of an oil well haha) but even as a full fledged rancher I too did not know that word for cattle How fascinating!!!! I think you make some great points as well concerning broom(s) So so logical!!! Concerning chambering you're bang on (no pun or innuendo inteded) - he needs to give you at least half a point - so true Awesome video!

[@markwardonwords]

You and your puns, Dustin! What would we do without you?!

[@captainnolan5062]

From the context of his video I guessed that the false friend would be "Study", and after watching the rest of his video found that it was. However, did you catch his quick mention just before that of "eat the meat and spit out the bones"? As an avid King James reader, he should know that there are no bones in most "meat".

[@aNeighbour]

Nope. Maybe I'm not as smart, but I didn't have a clue what besom meant. Not even with the context.

[@markwardonwords]

My wife and I were the same.

[@EricCouture315]

@aNeighbour i surveyed my church. Out of roughly 30 people only 2 knew it was a broom and they all got to read the verse in context.

[@gsw313]

The word besom honestly I didn't have a clue until you mentioned it. I am thankful for your work. You have opened my eyes to many wonderful translations of GODS word that are far easier for me to read than the kjv.

[@Dwayne_Green]

Mark! You are now popularizing the word "besom" so much so that it's no longer going to be considered an archaic word! 😛

[@markwardonwords]

That argument of his was, I admit, rather unexpected!

[@jimreem1693]

3:28 the OED is "only" $100 US annually, practically a violation of the 8th commandment it's so cheap. 😄 Just consider it part of the price of sticking with the "free" KJV.

[@Agben35]

Love what you do. Interested to see where you taking the content after KJVO

[@markwardonwords]

Pray for wisdom for me!

[@MAMoreno]

Watch out, Douay-Rheims! ;)

[@annakimborahpa]

@@MAMoreno But are there DRV Onlyists to challenge?

[@MAMoreno]

@@annakimborahpa Yes, actually. Some traditional Catholics lean in that direction.

[@annakimborahpa]

@@MAMoreno Lean? Are they in communion with Rome? They may hold it privately, but cannot publicly affirm a DRV Only position if they are in communion with Rome. Maybe the Anglican Ordinariate has permission to use the DRV in their liturgy but they cannot profess the exclusion of other translations, particularly the ones permitted for use in worship for all of the various Catholic Rites.

[@Asher0208]

Thanks Mark. May we all do our best to present ourselves to God as ones approved by Him. Workers who are not ashamed and who correctly handle the word of truth.

[@markwardonwords]

Right!

[@markwardonwords]

You found it!

[@gregb6469]

The best modern term for 'chambering' would be 'sleeping around'.

[@markwardonwords]

Yes, agreed! I said this very thing in this video: kzbin.info/www/bejne/iJfFfoh5ZZp1eKc Good point!

[@AndrewHodgeson]

#nerdsquad lol Such great work and presentation with grace and mercy among our Christian brothers and sisters.

[@Yesica1993]

Much love to you, Dr. Ward. But just a side note. Online sources can be easily changed / censored. That's why a while back I went to a used bookstore and got a huge, hardcover dictionary. I can't recall if it was Oxford one of the other major ones. But I wanted a physical dictionary because of this issue.

[@loveisall5520]

Amen. I still have 3 hardbacks on my shelf for exactly that reason. Thanks for making the point.

[@DerMelodist]

While I will miss your insights into the KJV, your honorable discharge leaves me with bated breath for your next venture.

[@markwardonwords]

I'd like to find out what it is myself!

[@jamesduly2184]

I had just started to watch this video and reached the 1:31 mark when my wife asked did I know what the word for a witch's broom was? I said, 'Besom'. When I inquired why she asked I was told it was an answer in the Quick Crossword of the Daily Mail.

[@genewood9062]

A "witches broom" is also a fungus infection of spruce trees. A cluster of short dry twigs.

[@mrbuck1911]

“…silently swept to the edges.” 😂 I see what you did there. “Emerods,” I learned this word in a KJVO church in the early 80s when I was in late elementary school. Boy, that was fun flexing our new found knowledge for our parents and our Christian school teachers.

[@gregorytoews8316]

Tolkien describes Treebeard's beard as a besom. I grew up in Manitoba, speaking plautdietsch (a Mennonite dialect) as well as English. In plautdietsch the word for broom is bahsum. Old Saxon is a root language for plautietsch. None of this is applicable to Mark's video; it's just a convenient way for me to be nerdy about the fascinating ways that languages interconnect.

[@Yesica1993]

!!! OH! I may have seen the word and didn't remember!

[@markwardonwords]

So interesting!

[@comptech9765]

I take issue with "guessing" a meaning within the Bible. A Bible translation should be clearly understandable within the target language.

[@markwardonwords]

Right! As much as possible!

[@rodneyjackson6181]

Definitely translations need updated because of language change. I dont want to read to people about "those who pisseth on the wall" when we can just use " male." For anyone to say the KJV is easier to read and understand than modern translations is totally absurd.

[@markwardonwords]

It is indeed absurd. But people keep saying it. People keep saying and believing-and dividing from other Christians over-absurd things. What do we do? We pray and work. We build on common ground. We patiently instruct those in opposition.

[@craigpatterson3612]

@@rodneyjackson6181 Except those are the words (in Hebrew) used in the books of Samuel and Kings. The Hebrew doesn’t say “male” in those passages, unless you paraphrase that part of the sentence.

[@rodneyjackson6181]

Except we speak English and it may say that in Hebrew, but who is it talking about? Males in Nabal's household. Certainly not females unless they are incredible acrobats.

[@rodneyjackson6181]

​@@markwardonwordsagree Bro. Mark!

[@loveisall5520]

@@rodneyjackson6181 I can remember as a child finding that phrase in my little Bible and asking my mother about it.

[@AICW]

"Chambering" is still used today... only in the context of firearms. As in, a pistol or rifle "chambering a round."

[@markwardonwords]

True!

[@davidbrock4104]

I'm thankful that my eyes were opened to using other translations...

[@markwardonwords]

Praise God!

[@MAMoreno]

"Besom" is easily the most acceptable of these three words to show up in a translation. It really depends upon the register of the English used in the translation. For instance, I wouldn't be surprised to run across it in a translation such as the Revised English Bible or the Jerusalem Bible, but it would be utterly inappropriate in the New Living Translation or the Good News Bible. I should note, though, that a search on Amazon for "besom" brought up an abundance of brooms, from basic besoms to sweeping Swiffers.

[@voyager7]

Hello, also from Canada!

[@AustinBurch1]

I’ve had a couple Instagram jousting matches with the what’s in your Bible guy. It was interesting

[@michaelkelleypoetry]

I would say that besom, chambering, and emerod are obsolete, not archaic. I don't think an archaic word should necessarily be removed, though some probably ought to be. Even Beatrix Potter in her children's book Peter Rabbit used the word 'soporific', a word likely outside the child's vocabulary, but it gives parents the excellent chance to respond to the child's question, "Well, let's look it up," and showing the child how to use a dictionary, helping the child grow to love reading and be good at it. Similarly, in the Bible, if a word is dead, obsolete, yes, it ought to be removed. If it's a false friend, then it definitely needs to be changed. But merely archaic, then maybe, but not necessarily.

[@markwardonwords]

Fair. Chambering is surely obsolete. Besom is, strictly speaking, archaic. But the difference between archaic and obsolete is irrelevant for the vast majority of English speakers who simply do not know the word.

[@curtthegamer934]

Beatrix Potter all but outright defines "soporific" right after it's used. "It is said that the effect of eating too much lettuce is soporific. I have never felt sleepy after eating lettuce, but then I am not a rabbit." Pretty obvious from the context what the word means (at least I understood it fine as a kid as well), and I think it was intentionally written this way so that kids would understand the word while also not feeling like they were being talked down to. Edit: Also, as a side note, though it doesn't really change any important point in the discussion, it's from The Flopsy Bunnies, not Peter Rabbit.

[@ChristopherAlsruhe-si9ff]

Regarding the speech recognition, maybe give him the rest of that point. My iPhone when I do Voice texting does not recognize the word 'are' And a host of other modern words.

[@Beefcake1982]

So likewise ye, except ye utter by the tongue words easy to be understood, how shall it be known what is spoken? for ye shall speak into the air. ‭‭1 Corinthians‬ ‭14‬:‭9‬ ‭KJV‬‬

[@markwardonwords]

Right!

[@FindingHopeInYourScars]

I have several different translations that I use in study, but the KJV is my primary Bible. I grew up using it and I'm used to it. But I found myself confused by some of the old archaic words. I found a useful little booklet from Chick tracts which contains a list of all the old KJV words and a brief definition. So when you come across "Besom" in the Bible, you can use the companion to see that it means "broom."

[@markwardonwords]

Thanks for sharing!

[@stefanhenning40]

Hi Dr. Ward! Is there any news or update on the upcoming KJV-o debate? I'm really looking forward to it.

[@markwardonwords]

I need to post something today-it's coming! Monday night at 7 pm Central!

[@BrendaBoykin-qz5dj]

Thank you, Brother Mark🌹🌟🔥🌟🌹

[@markwardonwords]

You are so welcome!

[@EricCouture315]

The KJV Translators praised Jerome for his academic prowess. Saying that he was one of the most gifted men in his day to do the work of translation. Jerome in his argument with Augustine over the type of plant that shaded Jonah rendered it as an ivy/vine. Augustine wanted to see gourd. Jerome argue that gourd was incorrect according to the Hebrew but that the most accurate rendering of the plant would be unintelligible to the Reader and that ivy/vine was accurate enough AND intelligible to convey accurately the Hebrew and the message intended. The KJV Translators were right to praise him and he was right to consider the reader and the accuracy without being so literal as to be unintelligible. So should besom be used in place of broom in order to be more accurate but unintelligible? No.

[@genewood9062]

Brother Mark: You and I have talked about "chamberings", in Romans 13:13, before. I understood it well, from the context. But others do not. I just looked at several translations, and they seem just too generic, euphemistic, and unspecific. But an idea came to me. Since the Greek word is literally, "beds", why not translate this as "BED-HOPPING"? Fits the context, says what the Greek means, yet without being crude. Not suitable for children, to be sure; but neither is the rest of the verse, either.

[@markwardonwords]

Viable! Just a little casual!

[@RustyMadd]

Was I able to understand what besom meant from the context? No. I was able to guess, but is that sufficient when we are studying the word of God?

[@ibuythose4309]

Hey Mark, I've made a chart on Bible manuscripts that I'd like for you to take a look at if you're able to, I would appreciate your opinion. I was looking for an email but couldn't find one on here. How can I reach you and send you the digital image?

[@derrickpurdy7011]

According to his LinkedIn page, which took me less than three minutes to find, Steven Hite received a Doctor in Theology (ThD) from Andersonville Theological Seminary.

[@markwardonwords]

Ah, good show! As of right now, as best I can tell, Andersonville has one legitimate PhD who teaches one class.

[@CC-iu7sq]

Sooooo here’s the important question, Mark. Will you be touching on reformed theology come 2025? Perhaps nerdy church history? I’ve been a fan over the last year and I don’t think I’ve missed a single video (including going back and watching most of your old ones) and commenting on probably dozens of them. Been diving a lot into Protestant heritage and dabbling in Baptist Reformed-ish tradition just learning about all of it for probably the last 6 months. I’ve been spending an unhealthy amount of hours just listening to debates (James White mostly) and reading and learning lol. Just curious if you’ll be diving into that a little bit after you leave the KJVO sphere?

[@losthylian]

I am troubled by what I see as even calm, measured people arguing fundamentally incoherent ideas. It frustrates me, and all I'm doing is watching from the sidelines! I think I understand your desire to put the matter to bed and move to new discussions. "You think we have to rely on men to understand what the Word of God says!" vs "If you don't understand it, you can turn to a pastor or a dictionary that will explain it to you." "You trust scholars as your authority instead of the Holy Spirit." vs "50 of the most scholarly and Godly men ever came together to make this book." "God's Word has been kept perfect and pure through all ages." vs "The KJV had to go through a refinement process." And attempts to say "There's a flaw in your logic" are met with "God has chosen the foolish things of the world to put to shame the wise." Taking a passage about God becoming man, that man dying accursed on a tree, and trusting him being the path to life everlasting, and using it instead to say "see, my logical contradiction is actually proof I'm right." It's audacious! Perhaps I am spending too much time looking into cognitive dissonance. I see it in KJVO discussions. I see it in FlatEarth matters. It comes up in apologetics dealing with atheism, Islam, Mormonism. I encounter it when facing some of the legalism within my own circles I've grown up with. It happens when discussing things as inconsequential as video games! And I keep coming back to observe it out of some morbid curiosity. To analyze a situation that does not compute in the hopes of one day finally discovering how best to help. My wife does say that I'm a robot, and while my logic circuit does not short out at such things, it does tend to rise in temperature when it is overworked. I of course say this as a being of perfect objectivity, never once having had an irrational or contradictory set of beliefs! 😅 I greatly appreciate your efforts. It is my prayer that I will be ready to respond with a similar level of humility if I must ever struggle with a brother on this topic!

[@markwardonwords]

I’m with you. It’s terribly frustrating, even frightening, to watch. But many young men in the KJVO world are seeing this, too.

[@DouglasBFrancis]

Mark, you mentioned in one of your videos that you had once considered doing an update to the KJV. I wonder if that is still something that interests you. I think there is a place for someone to take the KJV and genuinely and simply update it rather than do a new translation altogether.

[@markwardonwords]

Yes. But KJVO leaders and institutions must have skin in the game from the beginning.

[@DouglasBFrancis]

@@markwardonwordsIs that mostly for some assurance that it would be well received?

[@markwardonwords]

​@@DouglasBFrancis Yes. It takes immense effort to do a good job on a translation. I do not want to waste that time. I need buy-in from KJVO leaders/institutions before I will start. Or it needs to come from Cambridge themselves.

[@jevans6268]

I'm not a huge fan of quote un quote updating the kjv, however i would be opposed to an update to the defined kjv or even a cambridge version of the defined kjv. I love the cambridge font.v

[@miketisdell5138]

Mark, I decided to check the Hebrew to see if anything was added to the discussion; however, in this case it is a hapex. and so it really adds nothing. However, I did find it interesting that טאטא is onomatopoeic; in Hebrew four letter roots are very often onomatopoeic; some others are זמזם and צלצל can you guess what they mean?

[@markwardonwords]

It does come from a root for sweeping. I can't guess what those mean! Onomatopoeia is in the ear of the beholding language speakers!

[@danabbott2398]

I remember playing the word game "Scrabble". I spelled a word that was common to my trade. My opponents thought i made up a ficticious word simply they because they not were not familiar with my line of work. The common person is not a theologian and could be unnecessary burdened with difficult words. I think most theologians would not know difficult words when they were 10 years old. God's communication is of no value if everyone does not understand.

[@nicobrits5111]

The bottomline is they believe the king James translation is inspired that is why they would not budge to make the most trivial updates.

[@markwardonwords]

You have accurately described many KJV-Onlyists.

[@Yesica1993]

Which is horrifying to me because it's OBVIOUSLY false. What about the other, what, 99 (?) percent of the world that doesn't know English? They cannot have the inspired Word? How does that even make logical sense, when the Bible 1) wasn't written in English and 2) ENGLISH DID NOT EXIST! I'm sorry for capslock yelling, but this drives me insane! God bless Dr. Ward for his patience. Seriously. I do not share it. I can't stand willful ignorance. Ignorance is one thing. I am ignorant of a great many things. (Including "besom", which I had to look up the other day.) But when you're given facts, or when something is simple common sense if you think about it for 5 minutes, that's where my patience ends and my irritation begins.

[@arditienthusiast8384]

​@@markwardonwords How they can go and spit on the reformers by taking their sacrifice and turning it around to do the exact same thing is beyond me. It truly is a dogmatic blindness. I feel like there's a witch of en-dor moment in there somewhere where they get rebuked by Tyndale's ghost.

[@therealkillerb7643]

Great video! One "quibble" about ploughboys and dictionaries. In my experience, especially in teaching Bible study methods, the first and arguably most important tool I recommend is a decent English dictionary, because even with college educated people, really bad mistakes are made in understanding simple English words - not to mention, simple English grammar. Maybe you associate/teach a better class of ploughboy but the number of times people make really silly mistakes in interpretation just because they do not really understand what a word means... ;-)

[@markwardonwords]

I don’t disagree! And it’s true: I usually teach graduate students.

[@Yesica1993]

General illiteracy, plummeting reading levels, and people not reading at all these days is a huge issue that I wish someone would address. That's part of the problem these days. I hear people saying that the ESV and even NIV are "too hard". I'm not sure if this is correct, but I have the NIV84. I think I remember hearing that this was written at a 7th grade reading level. Now, that's 7th grade in the late 80s, not now. But if people NOW can't understand it, what does that say about our educational system? I watched a video recently about how even college students are now complaining to their professors that reading whole books is too difficult for them. That's horrifying to me. I am watching an entire culture become illiterate, right in front of my eyes, and few people seem to notice, much less care. This has HUGE implications for Christianity. We are, to use a phrase from Islam, "People of the book." But what good is a book if you can't read it? The solution is not to keep "dumbing things down." The solution is to raise people up as far as reading levels. But that's beyond the scope of this video and this channel. Hopefully someone else can take up this cause. I'm at my wit's end. I feel like I'm watching society spiral down the drain and I am helpless to stop it.

[@annakimborahpa]

@@Yesica1993 Literacy is alive and well in the utopian youtube, thank God.

[@MAMoreno]

@@Yesica1993 I think the solution is a mix of both. If you can't figure out how to make the Bible clear to people of a generation with low literacy, then who will be left to pass on Christianity to the subsequent generation with higher reading levels? Dumbing it down isn't a long term solution, but it's arguably a necessary stopgap.

[@inquirerjoe9157]

Of these things put them in remembrance, charging them before the Lord that they strive not about words to no profit, but to the subverting of the hearers. (2 Timothy 2:14)

[@WatchtowerHunter]

I am waiting for Oxford to let me know if that want just one kidney. Thanks for the suggestion.

[@Yesica1993]

8:31 I REMEMBER THAT CARTOON WITCH! Oh. I'm old.

[@markwardonwords]

Ha! Join the old club!

[@captainnolan5062]

Chambering does have a modern meaning. For example: "When my father was putting a bullet in his pistol, he was chambering another round." That did not mean he was going from bed to bed fornicating (i.e. chambering) a second time (i.e. another round).

[@markwardonwords]

Right! I talked about this in a recent video.

[@ruckanitepreacher5618]

Chamber to me makes think of a judge on TV says: i will discuss this further with you in my Chambers. So chamber doesn't make things easier for me to understand Chambering. (My spelling may be off i know)

[@markwardonwords]

Sure-so what would it mean as a verbal, a gerund?

[@seansampson1927]

Besem is broom in Afrikaans which comes from Dutch. Guess it demonstrates the germanic origins of English.

[@markwardonwords]

More than likely, yes, though I'd have to check…

[@petercarter8455]

Besem means broom in many non-English languages. For example Afrikaans, and probably Nederlands. Note however it is spelled as besem not besom

[@travismoore7938]

I never knew what besom, chambering or emerods meant until your videos. I remember when I was a young man wondering what an emerod was. Now I know … unfortunately.

[@michaelstrauss6587]

Again, if the KJV onlyist truly believed the archaic to be nonarchaic they would always be speaking it. Not once did he eth-en give forth a thou. And as to his emerods arguments, he totally wrecked em. ....sorry....

[@markwardonwords]

They never speak in KJV English. And this never seems to bother them, even when they're saying openly that our English-the very English they are using to say it-is degraded.

[@jimyoung9262]

When you stop doing the KJVO stuff you have to find a way to keep that "Elizabethan Voice" ministry going. Your gift belongs to the body and we need that. 😉

[@markwardonwords]

Ha! Probably can't provide for my family that way … That's my need right now!

[@redsorgum]

As I mentioned on another video of yours, Acts 28:13 And from thence we fetched a compass, and came to Rhegium: and after one day the south wind blew, and we came the next day to Puteoli: Fetched/fetch and compass are words that we still use. But in the context of this verse, it’s meaning isn’t the same as we would use today. NKJV: From there we circled round and reached Rhegium. Why is it a sin for KJV only folks to to translate it the way NKJV did? Of course this is only one example.

[@markwardonwords]

Right!!

[@Yesica1993]

I actually would not use the YT auto transcript as an argument for anything. It's awful. It gets things wrong even when a person is speaking loudly and clearly and using normal words. As a transcriptionist, it makes my eyes bleed!

[@markwardonwords]

I getcha. ;) Not maybe the strongest argument I've ever used on the channel!

[@fox7mio]

This whole argument is new to me, so I watched a hundred of your videos after my previous church started to worship king james and turned openly hostile to other versions, and me, because I didn't play along with kjv only, among other silly things. They also witch hunted people who accidentally said easter and anyone who loved their animals because fido has no soul. Thats why my two happiest finds in the king james are "easter" in acts 12:4 and "souls" of all living things in job 12:10. The other translations don't have those.

[@markwardonwords]

Wow. So sad! Why do Christians need to divide like this? Division, contention, and strife are works of the flesh according to Gal 5!

[@Yesica1993]

I have never heard of a church going from accepting other translations to KJVO. That's wild.

[@fox7mio]

I'm sure it was in there from day one, it just surfaced over the years. They went from a home Bible study on Wednesday to a full blown church to a sent Baptist church and then influenced by a few strict new members they all tried to out holy each other until the jokes started about other perversions of the bible then it wasn't a joking matter any more.

[@hotwax9376]

As bad as this guy's arguments are, I've gotta give him props for the Looney Tunes clip.

[@markwardonwords]

Yes! A classic!

[@justhearken8106]

There are two kinds of Pastors and leaders i meet in Christianity now. One group, that believes they can use any good Bible translation to preach and teach their flock and yet does not preach and teach their own flock, and does not apply it in their own lives. And another group of Pastors and leaders who are more concerned about "the jot and tittles" in the KJV than understanding what the words of KJV Bible really mean, and does not properly preach and teach their flock, rightly dividing the truth. In the that process, they do not properly apply the words they are simply reading from the KJV Bible in their own lives. sad.

[@markwardonwords]

Boy: God helping me, I want to preach and teach and live the same truths. And I know ESV, NASB, NIV, CSB, NKJV, and KJV preachers who do the same.

[@justhearken8106]

@@markwardonwords You're Blessed that you can confront, on-line, those KJV only Pastors and leaders and those not using their translation to lead their flock....i have been called to confront them face to face....not complaining....somebody has to do it. I have seen and heard many strange things regarding those who "claim" they are following the teachings of the Bible. I had a Pastor last year tell me; "I believe that the King James Version Bible is greater than the name of Jesus Christ." It did not matter what Bible verse i quoted to him.....he did not want to believe. Very simply put...."Bibles are not nailed to a cross and Bibles cannot bleed....." He just kept quiet. Thanks for your video work and response.

[@EricCouture315]

Ok chambering is accurate. But no modern translation at first glance just says "immorality" any that say "immortality" also include the adjective "sexual" ... sexual immortality

[@markwardonwords]

An excellent point I failed to note.

[@davegarciaofficial]

I’m honestly trying to understand this ongoing “pursuit” (for lack of a better word) of KJV-onlyists. What does it matter if they believe this? Others can use their NIV or whatever and get on with their lives.

[@lauriekurad]

It's a Diversion Tactic.

[@nerdyyouthpastor8368]

They're welcome to use the KJV, but they are teaching others that all modern English translations are demonic. I grew up believing that no regenerate person could ever willingly choose a modern "perversion."

[@ibuythose4309]

I'm not sure I understand completely what you're trying to say, but a KJVO position is one that can and often does cause needless division. This is especially true between Independent Fundamental Baptist (IFB) churches and other churches or believers. It's definitely an issue that should be addressed. There are genuine concerns that might cause someone to use the KJV alone, and those concerns are respectable and worth acknowledging. (There are answers to those concerns) If you can understand the topic, you will realize that the borderline double inspiration KJVO position is a step backwards in the Christian world. Side Note*** Mark focuses more on the translation side of things than the textual side of things.

[@fnjesusfreak]

A lot of KJVOs actually go so far as to say that the KJV is the _only_ valid Bible, either in English, or sometimes in ANY language, and that anyone who uses any other translation is going to hell. And they are VERY vocal about this. I've said: With supporters like these, what need does God have of the devil?

[@Yesica1993]

Exactly! It's baffling to me.

[@CocoRio]

Interestingly enough, the KJV-only gentleman has boxed himself in, making himself archaic along with the archaic translation he's arguing to "save." To his argument, that all words once defined are established for all time, in that he forgot to consider how definitions have changed over time, which causes confusion. Currently, modern English speakers whom may be aware of the current definition of _besom_ being a witch's broom would therefore interpret the word as such in their minds, on-the-fly, while reading their Bible, and never even consider the need to consult a dictionary for any older definitions. I say, leave him to his moot points and his swiss-cheese, red-herring arguments, and use your time sharing your vast knowledge of scripture, and of translations that make sense to modern English speaking readers. By the way, I was raised to be KJV-only, and it has taken me decades to pry myself away from that archaic (and flawed) translation. Yes, I memorized many scriptures in KJ English. But I haven't picked one up to read in a long, long time. NASB, CSB, ESV and others stay true to the original pretty well. And there's always my Interlinear Greek-English Bible just in case I want more accuracy. Lastly, who wants to carry around 50 pounds of dictionaries just to read their English Bible anyway? Not me.

[@CocoRio]

Pausing again to comment. When Hite made his point on "chambering" he added the word "bed" which brought more clarity to the text. He added one word yet he, however, doesn't see the fallacy within his own argument. He proved the need for clarity but says KJV doesn't need a revision. Wow. He's swiss cheese with his logic...

[@russell13904]

I think you're giving him points he didn't win. In place of 'chambering,' the equivalent term used across most modern translations is 'sexual immorality!' Not just 'immorality' on its own.

[@markwardonwords]

Good point. I should have noted this.

[@fnjesusfreak]

A phrase like "sleeping around" might fit the bill, though the register might be too low for a Bible.

[@MAMoreno]

@@fnjesusfreak It's suitable for the Common English Bible: Don’t you know that your bodies are parts of Christ? So then, should I take parts of Christ and make them a part of someone who is sleeping around? No way! Don’t you know that anyone who is joined to someone who is sleeping around is one body with that person? The scripture says, The two will become one flesh. (1 Cor. 6.15-16 CEB) But just as you have to read the room when you're speaking in person, so you have to read the register when choosing your gloss.

[@fnjesusfreak]

@@MAMoreno I fault the CEB too. Mainly because they seem to be trying to combine the worst elements of the NRSV with the worst elements of the NIV11.

[@MAMoreno]

@@fnjesusfreak I can't fault the CEB for doing what it says on the box. It is indeed in common English. (By contrast, I will fault the NIV for its name. How can you make a "new" international version if you don't have an "old" international version as the basis? And don't even get me started on the horror that is "Today's New" International Version.)

[@josephblazer87]

What is your opinion of words that are considered archaic in proscriptive English but have a dialecticical retention, like yonder?

[@markwardonwords]

I think there is tacit agreement in English by effectively everyone that the standard form of the language is what ought to be used in Bible translations.

[@Yesica1993]

Aaaaaww, I love that word. I even use it sometimes. LOL!

[@josephblazer87]

@@markwardonwords Thanks for the reply. That's probably for the best, even if it leaves us with problems like plural you, which almost all English dialects have a better alternative to. 😄

[@timlemmon2332]

I hate to give you more ammunition, but in the same verse that uses besom which to most of us understand to be a broom, there is another word that is harder to understand. The word bittern is hard to understand even using context. I will remain KJV only even though it could use an update.

[@markwardonwords]

I appreciate this. Our mutual goal ought to be understanding God's word, even if we disagree about which translation is best!

[@TerryLowe-zh3iu]

I'm wondering if saying it could use an update would get you disqualified as KJV only. 😊. I am curious from your perspective how the NKJV falls short? Not a criticism. I'm wondering what the common ground for an update would be from your point of view. 😊

[@timlemmon2332]

@@TerryLowe-zh3iu there are a host of reasons not to like the NKJV. There are footnotes that bring doubt as to whether or not you should believe certain passages in the Bible. For instance if you read the footnote at John 7:53 or the footnote in Mark 16 I forget if it was verse 8 or 9. It says these things are not in the original text. There are many other footnotes like this. Another reason is the use of the word servant instead of son to describe Jesus in Acts 3. Then there is the question of have we been saved or are we being saved. Many places it reads more like the critical text than it does the KJV. I cannot name all the problems in the comments section here, there are just too many. That being said, I am not opposed to updating the language of the KJV, after all, it has been updated 4 times since the 1611 version came out. Spelling has drastically changed since that time. We no longer use v as u or i as j.

[@MAMoreno]

@@timlemmon2332 I disagree with your interpretation of the NKJV's footnotes at John 7.53 and Mark 16.9. The translators are trying to remain neutral, but it's rather obvious that they assume the texts to be authentic. - John 7.53: NU brackets 7:53 through 8:11 as not in the original text. They are present in over 900 mss. of John. - Mark 16.9: Vv. 9-20 are bracketed in NU as not in the original text. They are lacking in Codex Sinaiticus and Codex Vaticanus, although nearly all other mss. of Mark contain them. Note how they stack the deck in favor of the longer readings by pointing out how well they are attested. They note the opinion of the NU scholars at first, but then they counterbalance the statement with the overwhelming testimony of the manuscript tradition. As for using "servant" instead of "son" in Acts 3.13, et al., their reasoning is based on two points. First, the word being used here (παῖδα) is not the normal word for "son," but a word that can mean "child" or "servant." See Acts 4.25, where even the KJV didn't think to call David a "son" or "child" despite the fact that he is called a παιδός. So we need context to make a proper call on the matter. Second, Peter's reference to Jesus as a παῖδα could mean that Jesus is the suffering servant of Isaiah 41-53 (referred to as the παῖς in the LXX). We might be inclined to say that Peter instead has in mind the "son" of Psalm 2 (since it is quoted in Acts 4.25-26), but if that were the case, we would expect Peter to use the word υἱός (the usual word for "son," and the one found in Psalm 2.7 LXX). Now, the main thing in the KJV's favor is tradition. And by that, I mean that the Vulgate uses "Filium" in the verses from Acts 3. (In Acts 4.25-27, the Vulgate uses pueri and puerum for David and Jesus, respectively. This word, like παιδός, παῖδα, and παῖς, can mean either "child" or "servant," depending on context.) So it's not a clear win for the NKJV, but either translation is defensible.

[@miriclamier2875]

Study hey hey

[@markwardonwords]

Yup!

[@EricCouture315]

I don't have to watch his video to know which ironic false friend he tripped over cuz it's always the same one. Study.

[@markwardonwords]

Yup. You've been around the KJV block!

[@loveisall5520]

People like this 'doctor' drive so many away from the Christian church and consequently, the joy of Christian community and possibly, the Christian faith. His own bloated ego gets in the way of true agape love, to instead give the appearance to the non-Christian, non-Churched that our faith consists of silly nitpicking where the forest is indeed ignored to examine the bark on those trees. People like this 'doctor' make me glad that I can read the Bible in both French and Spanish and slowly in Latin. Problem solved--for me, anyway.

[@Mariaf12]

People that read modern day transaltions still argue amongst themselves about which transaltion is the right one.

[@markwardonwords]

And I've told them all to stop! kzbin.info/www/bejne/nXfWgqltj5mdn9U

[@KJV-Ruckmanite]

Totally agree with you here, Mark. This is a bad faith argument and my KJV brethren need to stop this. It IS obvious. The trendy buzzword for what he’s doing here is “gaslighting.” He’s trying to make his listeners doubt reality. Archaic does NOT mean “unable to be researched and defined.” Archaic means they have become rare or obsolete in common use. By redefining archaic to mean “able to be googled” he is strongly gaslighting his viewers.

[@markwardonwords]

My friend, this is why I can't accept the argument I hear from you regularly that these false friends are known issues among KJV-Onlyists. They don't just ignore me or dismiss me; they actively deny me-and the very dictionary they're holding. You and a guy named Chancey (here on KZbin) are some rare exceptions. I really appreciate this comment. You and I have had our differences, that is for sure. But here we can really agree!

[@KJV-Ruckmanite]

@@markwardonwordsYou’re right, and point taken. These are known issues, but they will not admit that publicly for fear of losing ground, or for fear of the “slippery slope” (which you dealt with). So they will either go silent or worse, gaslight. It will be interesting to see how Hailfley discusses readability with you. I hope honestly.

[@theydontknowmeson007]

This gentleman is very disingenuous.

[@markwardonwords]

A word I prefer not to use for my opponents without a great deal of evidence.

[@theydontknowmeson007]

@@markwardonwords I can respect that. Sorry if I come off overly crass or critical.

[@theydontknowmeson007]

He comes across to me as if "there's just these few words we "don't understand" so use a dictionary." Maybe a better word would be "dismissive".

[@markwardonwords]

@@theydontknowmeson007 I think so. That's better. Thank you for yielding on this little but important point!

[@hiteproductions1808]

The more we keep changing words to how we speak then more we lose its original meaning. We need to stops changing or “improving” Gods word, and assume that God’s word is perfect in the first place.

[@markwardonwords]

My friend, if you happen to be the son of Steven Hite, I don't wish to quarrel with you.

[@MAMoreno]

The KJV's original meaning (let alone the original meaning of the Hebrew and Greek) will be lost if the words aren't changed in subsequent revisions. (Side note: By "subsequent revisions," I do not mean new editions of the KJV. If I buy a KJV, I expect it to use the original vocabulary for historical reasons. But if I buy a New KJV or a Simplified KJV, I expect the words to be updated.)

[@hiteproductions1808]

@@markwardonwords haha, yes I am his son. No quarrel, I in fact think your video was well made. A fantastic breakdown, of course I have some disagreements. Nor do I want to start a social media discussion.

[@markwardonwords]

@@hiteproductions1808 Having a KZbin channel has made me very interested in videography. I checked out the wedding video on your channel-excellently done.

[@hiteproductions1808]

@@markwardonwords thank you! That was a LONG time ago, I’ve worked on various other projects with other production companies. Reach out any time, would be glad to help with whatever questions you might have!

[@bibleprotector]

There are no "dead words" in the KJB. The fact that this video talks about and defines three words is what ensures and proves that its words are not dead. The OED is, by its own method a record of usage, it is not "prescriptive", and therefore even if the OED says various words are "archaic", "obsolete", etc., that does not match the reality of those words being continually present in the KJB, and being used, and being known. There is nothing to stop the multiplied manifestation of knowledge of KJB words. (Mark Ward wants to lock away words for ever, as it helps his cause, of getting people to use the NKJV (and ESV) etc.) Further, the OED is not the final authority on matters. There are words and meanings in the Scripture which the OED fails to comprehend. I'm not denying the OED is good and very knowledgeable, but it is a human work, whereas the KJB represents God's use of language. The example of besom is one that I have mentioned for years, I have said it is one that describes a specific kind of broom. It is one of the proofs I have given that KJB words has special meanings. Interestingly, the picture of the Egyptian broom could be called a "besom", as its handle includes the tied together sticks. The whole point of a translation is not to go to the Greek. And thus, chambering, we find, is in fact the correct and specific translation. I cannot but shake my head at Mark Ward, his very video is helping bring understanding on "besom", "chambering" and "emerods". Not only are these words not to derided as "obsolete" or "archaic" (in a propagandist sense), but discussing the words, having people watch these videos, the comments sections, is not God's providence even here detectable, that the precise and particular KJB words are right, and are not lost?

[@markwardonwords]

Does the KJV contain any archaic words?

[@MAMoreno]

I'll just ignore your main argument, as it's essentially no different than saying that _Romeo and Juliet_ contains no dead words simply because it is regularly taught to teenagers across the English-speaking world. Instead, let's consider your claim about one of the dead words: "The whole point of a translation is not to go to the Greek. And thus, chambering, we find, is in fact the correct and specific translation." This word reflects a sense of "chamber" that itself is uncommon anymore. Thus, it's now meaningless: the term "chambering" is a sounding brass and a tinkling cymbal. The correct and specific English equivalent of κοίταις is now "sleeping around" (CEB, MSG). For those who don't want something so vulgar, there's always "illicit sex" (NRSVue) or "promiscuity" (NASB, NAB, NLT).

[@bibleprotector]

@@markwardonwords In the propagandist sense, no. While there are technically specialised words that are known by an "in group" at this present time (we are all learning), to view this as a diminishing pool of knowledge is wrong. KJB words' rightness are not limited by some sort of statistical analysis or referencing temporal common vernacular, as if that was the standard. The standard, rather, is God and His plans and abilities. I side with the specific notion of God's promises related to making His truth/words known, which counters the entire naturalistic and somewhat scoffing argument about the KJB's alleged "archaic" words. I side with the supernaturalistic doctrine "what shall be" not the pessimistic theology based on the experience of the here and now. I believe this topic is part of what is meant in Isaiah 42:18-25. But I know your system of Bible interpretation will prohibit you from seeing that.

[@bibleprotector]

@@MAMoreno Actually, the main argument you mention is certainly keeping those literary words alive. Yes, I like billions, needed to learn what chambering means. I know what it means, and I remember what it means. That's how learning works. Your view is we could not and apparently should not all learn what a word, or words plural mean, and you step into the role of a prophet, I suggest not a knowledgeable one, when you essentially imply that it ain't going to happen. I know your view: you don't believe that the KJB is to be made known. You realise the Bible says "I will speak unto this people". The KJB is not cymbals, it's being made known. See this promise: 1 Cor. 14:21 "In the law it is written, With men of other tongues and other lips will I speak unto this people; and yet for all that will they not hear me, saith the Lord." The "this people" are the modern day scholarly class. But to the willinghearted, Prov. 1:23 "Turn you at my reproof: behold, I will pour out my spirit unto you, I will make known my words unto you." That's not merely Solomon's audience of Hebrew speakers, you understand. I will of course ignore your Greek and modern translations.

[@MAMoreno]

@@bibleprotector Matthew, you are literally the one who has been performing the role of prophet for years on the web, insisting with self-appointed authority that everyone must use a particular edition of the KJV. You even pulled the prophet card with Mark Ward just now, insisting that you know the plans of God. I'm sure you'll write it off as part of your Pentecostal beliefs, and I'm not going to turn this into a cessationist vs. continuationist debate; regardless, you're projecting.

[@waynemccuen8213]

I used a New Scofield KJV when I became a Christian in 1975. After attending church for a few years it was painfully obvious that the preacher spent a portion of most sermons explaining what the odd sounding words meant. At the time, there weren't 6 gajillion bibles available. I became a non KJV person. Although I still quote some verses KJV style. If I'm using an older commentary......well, that's usually KJV. I've found the KJVonliests some what whackerdoodle in their support for KJV only. Thank you Dr. Mark for your outstanding efforts in what must be a somewhat frustrating effort in bringing to light so much that needs exposed about this stance. A question if I may. Is there a modern English version of the KJV intro anywhere to be found? Either in your content or online elsewhere you can suggest?

[@markwardonwords]

Yes! There are several, I believe, but the one I know best is here: www.amazon.com/dp/B09ZQ3HPRN?tag=3755-20.

[@susannah1066]

KJV only was started by a 7th Day Adventist-Many people were saved through easier to understand Bibles. For me that was a Good News N.T.-never would have read a KJV Bible. We had them-no one read them. To deliberately keep people away from understanding and enjoying the Bible-seems like something from the dark side. 🦘

[@jimreem1693]

I’ve sat under preaching claiming that you could only be saved through hearing from the KJV. Corrupt tree - corrupt fruit. So even the argument of an easier to understand Bible won’t sway some KJVO folks.

[@susannah1066]

@@jimreem1693 But Jesus would disagree with them.

[@jimreem1693]

@@susannah1066The Jesus they have in their minds agrees with whatever they have interpreted the KJV to say. Convenient, yes?

[@susannah1066]

@@jimreem1693 They should be careful then-they might be some of the people He never knew.

[@jimreem1693]

@@susannah1066 so true, and so frightening.

[@gregb6469]

The best modern term for 'chambering' would be 'sleeping around'.

[@markwardonwords]

Yes, good!