King James Only to the CSB and other translations!

[@sdhute]

Love the MEV it’s been rumored to have an update coming with some of the typos fixed. Currently liking the BSB for the freedom of the text.

[@nikosadie]

Thank you for this video. I understand why some people use the KJV only and that is fine. People should just be careful about condemning other translations. There are millions of people who do not read English - are they now lost because they cannot read the KJV? I am not English but I can speak it and read it, but not at a very high level, so the KJV is not necessarily hard to read, but I have to concentrate so heavily on what I am reading that I do not think 100% about what I am reading. The NASB is also a bit tough for me. I do well with the ESV and CSB and I even read the NLT sometimes. Naturally, I also read the Bible in my home language. My day to day bible is the NKJV. I do find that sometimes I have to reach for the ESV or NLT when reading some parts. At the end of the day, it is the Holy Spirit that will reveal the truth. As long as the Bible is respectful and based on the original documents.

[@reginajames5107]

I understand, growing up in the Catholic faith, I switched to KJV for self-study. And, now, I have several other translations of the bible, but I always go back to KJV. My church uses the NASB during service and I bought a copy to go long during service but KJV is for me. We all need to get a copy of the bible that you are comfortable with. God bless your message.

[@bhcleadp2577]

That’s what I tell people at the church, use the Bible you are going to dig into and read. (As long as it is faithful to the original texts)

[@bohonea1602]

Thank you so much for this video!! I was just like you and was raised on kjv only . Ive struggled for years with using other versions, but I still saw the advantages of other versions. I am now using the csb too. I absolutely love it! That and the esv. Thanks brother, I greatly appreciate this video.

[@seekingthekingdomfirst]

Here's the simplest thing I can say about the whole KJV only thing, personally: Since 2001, the KJV was the main Bible I read, and I even erroneously called myself "KJV Only". I read books that argued for the KJVO stance, daily went to websites that defended the KJVO position, and had all sorts of arguments that I'd tell people about the KJV versus modern English versions. Except...I wasn't KJVO, truly. For if I came across a difficult word or passage, I looked at a different version. Which therefore leads me to wonder if actual KJVO people cross reference with other Bibles. Perhaps they don't -- yet they sure talk about other translations quite a lot, now don't they? In fact they seem to know other translations quite well, it would seem. So if they do cross reference with other English translations, they would never admit it aloud. Nowadays, for my personal memorization, I use a Thomas Nelson KJV that has the modern equivalent words either in the footnotes or center column. The fact that they (and Tyndale) started doing that a few years ago has helped me study the Bible with people who only want to use a KJV and nothing else (such as those who are LDS). Because KJV is so well known, and because in my defense of the KJV I would say that it was easiest to memorize, it is in fact the primary Bible from which I memorize all scripture to this day. I mean, if it ain't broke, why try to fix it? For general daily reading I use the Thomas Nelson NKJV chronological Bible, and then any verses I want to memorize from that daily reading I then follow up with the KJV. I think doing that is an interesting and easy way to absorb the scripture and make it a part of you. As a bonus, I'll listen to the KJV on audio at the same time that I read the KJV. The KJV Bible is on audio for free on KZbin and Audible, so it's super easy to just listen to the KJV being read to you while you read it. However, as I pick out the songs for our Sunday or Wednesday services and I need a quick glance at a Bible to read what the minister is going to be preaching on, I'll grab a CSB. I also use the CSB when studying the Bible with other people who either don't know that the KJV exists or have no preference in using a specific version.

[@adamtberry0]

what you are saying is so correct, I'm a youth pastor and i use different translations as well, the notion that "The Holy Spirit will give you the understanding of the KJV if you are saved" is a KJV only cult statement, they will also say you are not saved if you cant understand it and you are not saved unless you accept Christ under the preaching of the KJV, if you get saved under the preaching of say the NIV then you are NOT truly saved..... that's hogwash and preaching a different Gospel.... no truth in that. i for one am so happy to see the KJV moved down to # 4 on the most sold Bibles for 2023, its time for the Word of God to be understood and read in homes, if you are KJV only (as in telling people they are not saved if they cannot understand it) then i pray for you.

[@shawnglass108]

This is so great that you’re helping so many Brothers and Sisters dig deeper into studying God’s word. When William Tyndale made his fantastic English translation in 1526 he claimed he wanted the plow boy to know more of scripture than the priest. Thanks to God, His claim became reality. He was martyred for making his vision possible. I believe his cause is still incredibly noble. I still love and use my King James Bibles. Including my facsimile 1611 AV that weighs 30 lbs lol..but there is no need to only rely on 400 year old language. Our modern formal English translations are fantastic! We are truly blessed to have the greatest treasure of scripture study resources in the history of mankind..At least since the Apostle John. God Bless you and your ministry!

[@bhcleadp2577]

Thank you I think it is beautiful that we have so many amazing translations. I love the king James and it will always hold a special place in my heart but working with teens for so many years learned they just don’t understand the old English. So I found one they could and they started to at least try and read more. We live in a day and age with so many amazing resources!

[@elijahbaxter7163]

NKJV ESV NASB LSB are my favorites

[@bhcleadp2577]

All are very amazing!

[@0658BVB]

ESV is my primary physical copy, but I regularly use either Bible Gateway or YouVersion and switch at will to different versions -- mostly NLT, NIV, LSB, CSB, Berean Standard Bible, and NET. Different phrasing can sometimes give me a more robust understanding of passages, paragraphs, and even chapters. There is sooo much richness to absorb! I honestly haven't looked at the MEV (but it is on the Bible Gateway and YouVerson apps), so I may include that in the mix.

[@bhcleadp2577]

The MEV is a good translation, the only hard part is that it is very hard to come by there are only a few text blocks available

[@masont2429]

The problem with KJV onlyism is it goes way past “this is the translation for me.” If you use another translation, they doubt whether or not you’re even a Christian. It’s a very sad situation to be in.

[@bhcleadp2577]

Totally agree, some even go as far as to say if the KJV and the original text are different, then the KJV corrects the original.

[@bhcleadp2577]

@@ChristianRescue I can totally see that perspective, I think that’s why it important to research the translation philosophy and the why behind the project.

[@SeanGlazier]

KJV has problems , known ones that in the Old Testament especially like the ages of the patriarchs were changed to created a narrative that could explain melchizedek for instance. The accepted text does not match the Septuagint and the Samaritan versions either and the recent translation from the Dead Sea scrolls, the Dead Sea scrolls cleared up some language differences as well. Jesus quoted from the Septuagint and that was in black and white 300 bc and there are 2 full surviving copies intact and the Samaritan version as well. Also of note there’s the allepo codex which is nearly complete but only missing some pages where the complete word for God is used with pronunciation marks and the Israelis have those as well and kept under lock and key. It is one of the few perfect copies of the Torah that exist. You can get all these versions from the sword project for free as well as the blue letter Bible project

[@DesignInNature]

​@bhcleadp2577 The "Why" is money. Always money. The ESV has been "updated" 3 different times in the past 10 years. The NASB just got their 2020 update. The RSV has been also tampered with again in the past 5 years. All the changes in recent years have been explained as "necessary to clarify the GENDER NEUTRAL, GENDER INCLUSIVE language in the original text". That is ALL I needed to know to understand that the changes have NOTHING to do with 'making the language more understandable', and EVERYTHING to do with conforming the scriptures to modern LOST ideology. Only one Bible I know of in the world is safe from this constant tampering. Literally hundreds upon hundreds of versions claiming to "improve upon" and "replace" the KJV have come and gone over the last 4 centuries. They last 2 or 3 decades while being changed and edited to oblivion, fizzle out and eventually disappear. The Authorized Version is like a firmly established rock that you can stand on and will NOT be moved even if everything else around you is washed away by the constantly shifting waters of sinful, lost, degenerate ideologies.

[@masont2429]

@@DesignInNature which authorized version? The 1611, 1629, 1638, 1762, or 1769? At least I didn’t bring up the 1612. I agree wholeheartedly with you about new editions that go the way of the culture, but editions that go the way of the language is not the same thing. The king James also did that.

[@loitersquadX]

I read children's new century version. Its amazing. Catholics and Christians need to come together. Im sorry Christians but we need to include all the books we need to follow alot of tradition. And we need to get American to believe in the tradition. Marriage between man and woman. Make porn illegal. Abortion bans unless its necessary. But Catholics should not worship mary. Or other false idols

[@joeseczulaica3053]

That's why you have to pray for understand God doesn't want you to bust your head I'm not educated and I read the KJV I love to read the KJV , Is it hard to understand what the word love means That's what the word of God is it's called love You know In Genesis chapter one God uses the word heaven not heavens I like heaven The 1611 has heaven That's my problem with other translations I am a Bible collector also I do have quality bibles But for me it's not how they're made it's the word of God

[@PastorwithoutaPulpit]

I'm going to leave some important information below that many have never seen. It may make some angry or even confused as to why I'd post it on this video. If it does I do apologize but it really is that important. If it helps just one person it would be so worth it and if that person gets it they will share in my love, freedom and joy. Study is so important and one day a week is simply not enough. Buying into all the falsehoods of why it's not true or can't be His Word is deadly. With the amount of proof we now have in this age of abundance of information there's simply no longer any excuse or argument to be made. So here goes and for those that do read it please just think about what it means and will mean for you if you take it seriously: The case for Biblical accuracy and how we know we have the absolute, proven true Word of God in our modern Bibles if they maintain a word for word translation or as close as possible. First let's look at secular history and written sources that are taken as matter of fact. These other books and writings from antiquity are held up as truth and in some cases factual history. These other books/poems and there evidence/sources, data: Second most common manuscript document Homer's Iliad meaning there are more copies of it than any other secular writing/document from antiquity of which only 643 exist dating from 13th century AD. Homer is believed to have wrote it in the 8th century BC. The Gallic Wars of Cesar in 1st century BC, there are only 10 manuscripts of that in existence dating over 1000 years after they were supposed to have been written. Herodotus wrote of history and is known as one of the first historians 5th century BC and only 8 manuscripts exist and they are from more than 1300 years after he wrote anything. History of the Peloponnesian War written by Thucydides. There are only 8 manuscripts that are from 1300 years after he supposedly wrote his account. These are just a few examples but it doesn't get any better by adding more. Now let's look at Biblical proofs: There can be no doubt as to the accuracy of our current Bibles as it is proven via all the source fragments, scrolls, papyri, codex' and sources dating all the way back to before Christ around 700 BC for the OT and between 100 to 150 AD for the NT. There is no doubt and no room for any argument against these facts. We have more proof for God's Word than any other written word in history and it is by order of magnitudes more as in some 66,000+ such sources for Scripture. The early Church Fathers prior to 325 AD: Those known as the Anti-Nicene Fathers writings contain over 32,000 quotes from the New Testament from which we could reconstruct the entire/complete NT from just those. They also contain over 19,000+ quotes from the Gospels alone again from prior to 325 AD. All these sources allow us to be critical when it comes to the level of accuracy in our Bibles. The oldest manuscripts end The Gospel of Mark at chapter 16 verse 8. It is the perfect ending to Mark's Gospel when you think about it as there really was no more that needed said. There is a lot of evidence that anything after Mark 16:8 was added later gathering parts from all the other Gospels and even Acts. There have been many ideas put forward about why the rest was added but none truly fits, things such as knowing Mark's intent and inspiration and that had he been able he would have added to his Gospel. That after Peter was martyred he stopped short due to that but if you read his Gospel there's no need for anything to be added. There's also some idea that there's a lost ending but how can you think that if you don't even know if such an ending existed? So a bunch of endings began to appear, tacked onto the original Autograph. We have an abundance of evidence that prove anything after 16:8 was added later. 4th Century Church fathers Eusebius and Gerome both wrote that Mark ended at 16:8. Many, many other very early Church Fathers knew these alternate endings existed and didn't use them or just denounced them. This is a huge error in both the KJV and NKJV both of which are based on more recent manuscripts that the older manuscripts disprove. So those two translations have the added ending consisting of anything after Mark 16:8 in the Gospel of Mark. Newer translations may or may not include the additions after Mark 16:8 but if they do they're bracketed or mentioned in the notes in the margins, sidebar or at the bottom of the page. The external evidence, (oldest sources), indicates that anything after 16:8 does not belong in the Gospel of Mark because those additions simply do not exist in them. The internal evidence is that it is all borrowed from the other Gospel accounts and Acts. The transition from vs 8 to 9 is very awkward as in no transition from the story of the women, the use of a masculine pronoun, why would Mark also identify Mary Magdalene as the one whom Jesus cast demons from again, the angel spoke to Jesus' followers and told them He would appear to them in Galilee, the vocabulary is not Mark's there are 18 different words he never used, completely different structure to the writing, all these out of place themes, signs that don't appear in any of the other Gospels and the weird discussion of them like serpents and other such oddities are foreign to Mark. We don't know who these additions came from but we know where they got them: (below are not time stamps but Chapter and verses) .16:9 = is taken write out of Luke 8:1-3 .16:10 = John 20:18 .16:12 = Luke 24:13-32 .16:13 = Luke 24:14 .16:14 = Luke 24:36-38 .16:15 = Mathew 28:19 .16:16 = John 20:23 .16:17-18 = drawn from a lot of sources: Mathew 10, Mark 6, Luke 10, just a lot of stuff cobbled together. Acts 23-26 and Acts 28:3-6 Paul's encounter with the Asp/venomous snake. None of it after Mark 16:8 makes any sense and adds more than a little confusion with the discussion of signs/miracles and other such things. It is clear to see what was written after 16:8 was not inspired as the rest of his Gospel surely was. This was all done by someone or a group who thought Mark's ending was to brief. To help him get a "better ending" in their eyes because they couldn't accept how he had ended his. His True Gospel account of the life, death and resurrection of Christ Jesus and the awe and wonderment of it all. Why does Mark end the way he does? It was just how he wrote, look at the beginning of his Gospel and all throughout it reads like a highlight real of Christ's Deity and that He is in fact the very Son of God. He made the point and was done he didn't need to go further. Mark's last words were about fear, a Godly Fear of our Lord and the pure awe and wonderment of Him. No other book in history has the proof the Bible does, it is not even close. As I've shown because of the over abundance of source materials we can even be critical of what we have and know for certain whether we have His Word or not. Biblical Historian/Theologian AT. Robertson said we have a vast array of Biblical Manuscripts/Sources that allow us to reconstruct the Bible with more than a 99.9% degree of accuracy. With the number of archaeological excavations, (25,000+ and counting to date). Add in the current excavations under way throughout the Middle East, it is only a matter of time until we see more ancient biblical texts uncovered. Given the recent search for more Dead Sea Scroll caves, this may be sooner rather than later. The Bible is the very Word of God and It is a collection of eyewitness accounts written by other inspired eyewitnesses. There's no longer any excuse for anyone to ignore that fact or to dispute it. The evidence simply does not support their arguments/views. Take care and God Bless...

[@cindymccafferty8346]

I also grew up in a KJV church. I took your advice and bought a CSB Bible. I love it! Thanks for the advice. It gets pretty hairy when you’re reading things in KJV like superfluity of naughtiness. Lol

[@bhcleadp2577]

Awesome I am so happy you found a translation to dig into!! And I totally agree

[@cindymccafferty8346]

@@bhcleadp2577 I grew up with the KJV read in church 1960-70. We memorized verses in Lutheran parochial school. I’m 66 years old, and you can teach an old dog new tricks! I am really enthused about the CSB and it makes me want to read more. I’m also trying the Dr Grant Horner’s reading list. It’s giving me a great place to start reading the whole Bible. The Bible I’m using is the CSB Legacy Notetaking Bible.

[@bhcleadp2577]

@@cindymccafferty8346 that’s awesome note taking bibles are awesome for writing and getting what the spirit reveals on the page! Thank you this is so encouraging

[@WgB5]

So far I am finding the ESV to be unreliable. Both the HCSB and the CSB tend to be more accurate renderings.

[@aumtheaum3827]

I love and respect the KJV and the NKJV but I love my CSB a lot.

[@PlainD]

I'm curious to know what you think about the NKJV. Is it basically the KJV with a facelift?

[@bhcleadp2577]

Eh more or less, I see it as a “modern” twist on the king James

[@Phaphane06]

I never really read my Bible outside of church and one day God touched my heart and I decided to start reading/ studying my Bible. I knew I had a hard time reading KJV so I prayed and did my research. I now use the ESV and CSB for reading/studying. I use my KJV for church.

[@bhcleadp2577]

That’s awesome! I use the KJV if I am going to a church that uses that to speak or listen.

[@jc3113]

Question - I would love to use something other than the KJV for easier readability. I have noticed that words get changed in some of the other versions which change the entire meaning. So for example: I always look at Revelation 13:16, the KJV says: And he causeth all, both small and great, rich and poor, free and bond, to receive a mark in their right hand, or in their foreheads. -- In other translations they change the word "in" to "on" which completely changes the meaning. How do you account for that? That simple change could mean we get a chip in our hand, on means it could be a tattoo. That's a big difference and I feel like it could lead people astray.

[@bhcleadp2577]

Hey I would like to talk about this but would my mind dming my Instagram @Bhcleadp

[@Airik1111bibles]

Comparing an old English translation to another is the problem here. The Greek word is , ἐπὶ Which means "on" or you could say "upon" . The new translations are just using the proper meaning of the Greek word.

[@danielsell7598]

I like/use NKJV, KJV, and ESV (in that order).

[@hudsontd7778]

I like KJB, KJB, and KJB (in that order)

[@robertharryjr]

I love my CSB and my NRSV

[@bhcleadp2577]

I have wanted to take a look at the nrsv

[@MAMoreno]

@@bhcleadp2577 The NRSV can be a bit of a culture shock if you're used to traditional translations, which is somewhat ironic since it's from the exact same Tyndale-KJV-RSV tradition as the ESV. (In fact, it's usually nearly-identical to the ESV, though it's sometimes a bit less literal, akin to the CSB.) The 1989 edition will throw you off right from the start: *In the beginning when God created the heavens and the earth, the earth was a formless void and darkness covered the face of the deep, while a wind from God swept over the face of the waters.* And the 2021 updated edition will be even more unfamiliar: *When God began to create the heavens and the earth, the earth was complete chaos, and darkness covered the face of the deep, while a wind from God swept over the face of the waters.* But then it will start sounding very KJV-ish once you get past those two verses: *Then God said, “Let there be light,” and there was light. And God saw that the light was good, and God separated the light from the darkness. God called the light Day, and the darkness he called Night. And there was evening and there was morning, the first day.* That's a general idea of how you can expect the experience to go: a mix of familiar churchy language and radically different translation choices. (In case you're wondering, they went with "wind from God" because they noticed the text's parallels to Genesis 8.1. And the Updated Edition's alliterative "complete chaos" is a nod toward the fact that the Hebrew words rhyme.)

[@Kefa...]

Woe to lispers. The Pope assembled the Bible 💫

[@Kefa...]

Abraham's bosom/ paradise/purgatory

[@matthewwebb1303]

Excellant video. Love your testimony.

[@Agben35]

I really like all the different versions. I grew up early with a KJV, but then to NIV in high school and then got a NIV Life Application Study Bible out of college and kept it for 30 years of use. I think in the 2000’s I had a NKJV for a couple of years, but switched back to that same NIV study Bible. This past year I decided I needed a new Bible and had some requirements on format (wider margins, etc) but somehow walked out of the Christian bookstore with a Bible that didn’t meet my criteria, a NIV Every Man’s Study Bible (a fine Bible, but not what I had said I wanted when I walked in). But I didn’t do enough research and / or investigation. Since then, I’ve become a Bible Nerd , having bought 12 bibles since Christmas. And all with very different formats, translations, and prices. And I love them all! My reading Bible in the morning is a NASB , which I think will be my 2024 version/Bible for all Bible study and notes. But I’m absolutely loving gaining the knowledge and understanding of the differences and beauty of the various versions, translations, covers, etc.

[@SEL65545]

NASB 2020 or the 95?

[@SeanGlazier]

Try an Orthodox study Bible

[@craigime]

good to hear your honest reasons brother... i used to use the king james, but the ESV has become my main bible

[@AnthonyGrisier]

Good video! The translations I use are (in order) the CSB, NET 2nd edition, BSB (Berean Standard Bible), and the NLT.

[@bhcleadp2577]

I have been very curious about the BSB

[@Phillipmurr]

@@bhcleadp2577 it’s the NIV 1984, married to the King James version.

[@Real_LiamOBryan]

@@bhcleadp2577 BSB seems to have slightly more traditional translation choices, from what I've read, than CSB but is, overall, very similar. One Bible review site says it's like having ESV, CSB, and NLT all rolled into one. I'm trying to decide between BSB, CSB, and NET2, myself. I really like NET2, which I've been doing a lot of my studying with, but it just has a tiny handful of translation choices I don't care for.

[@bhcleadp2577]

@@Real_LiamOBryan I should get a BSB and look into, I really do enjoy the CSB though, the NET is a interesting translation as well

[@TheBibleReviewer]

Yeah KJV can be tough, I honestly have trouble staying focused reading ANYTHING, so I personally lean toward current English translations. Like the NLT and the CSB. I also use the ESV Study Bible for deep dives, but I don’t normally just straight up read ESV

[@RussFryman]

I've been using the NASB for 20+ years after reading the KJV. I'm a word study guy so one follows the other. I've been using the international standard version ISV for the last 5ish years. Sadly, it's not well supported. It is/has been my favorite

[@AndreThomasINC]

I use NET, NKJV NIV and the CSB

[@bhcleadp2577]

I have the NET and NKJV and I do like both of those.

[@Phillipmurr]

berean standard bible

[@halwiggam5465]

Why don't you read several transltion. I will read a passage in NASB then read the exact same passage in CSV. It reinforces the passage and helps me understand what I read.

[@Dylan-wn7dm]

Where does CSB fit on the line (word for word or thought for thought)

[@bhcleadp2577]

It’s a mix it stays word for word but uses thought for though

[@SoldierofChrist9]

I was KJVO and after a massive collation of 30 translations, I utilize two translations now.. KJV and LSB.

[@bhcleadp2577]

LSB is new but I enjoy that one as well

[@cakehippie4577]

LSB is excellent! Check out the ISR as well

[@Watchmanonthewall626]

Did you know the confederate flag is Israel heraldry?

[@kainech]

My main Bibles are the WEB, LES, EOB, KJV, and Knox Bibles, all for different purposes. The World English Bible is my favorite single volume Bible in modern language. It isn't copyrighted (and copyrighting the Bible, I believe, is a serious sin), is accurate, is complete, and was done by believers the world over in an open source manner rather than by committee or by one individual. It also uses a Byzantine text; I do not trust modern text critical decisions or the theology behind it. The Lexham English Septuagint is a very good translation of the LXX. The NT quotes the LXX about 80% of the time, and this isn't just because they were writing in Greek. They can, and did, both quote other versions and translate on their own. They preferred the LXX, and I think that makes it worth of study and possibly a candidate for primary OT. The EOB is a translation based off the WEB. I like it, because it's the only translation that actually translates the ενεργ- words. Other translations Latinize them, because the terms came to be of little importance to Latin-based Christian traditions (Latin couldn't express the active/passive distinctions). I use the KJV for cultural significance. I use the Knox Bible, not for study, but to read aloud to my children. It introduced thees and thous, but is fully modern in vocabulary. It is a parapharse, so it reads easily and is easy for children to follow and pick up some of the more archaic stuff so they can move on to older literature at the same time. It is a complete Bible too, so I get the Apocrypha with it.

[@Phillipmurr]

if you like WEB you might love the Berean standard bible BSB

[@kainech]

@@Phillipmurr The WEB fills the role it does successfully, because it is free, is a Byzantine text in the NT, and it has the apocryphal books. All of those are important to me for that niche. However I'll have a look at it in the future and see what it's like. Thanks :)

[@Phillipmurr]

@@kainech Berean standard Bible is free as well and has just been publicly domain. That’s why I thought of it

[@kainech]

@@Phillipmurr That's nice news. Do you know if they will include the Apocrypha at any point?

[@Phillipmurr]

@@kainech I don’t believe so unfortunately. Hopefully they don’t revise it every five years which is starting to become a trend. Like I want to memorise my translation. Not have a change on me constantly.

[@isaacbarcelona7864]

Figures the video about translations would get the most interaction. 😅 I'm sure people clicked on the video just waiting for you to attack it so they could unload.

[@bhcleadp2577]

It did happen my friend

[@twiceborn_by_grace]

Reading and studying out of the KJV for almost 20 years, I understand the old English for the most part. It’s how they mistranslated Acts 12:4 as “Easter” and also there is no such things as “cherubims”. In Hebrew, the “im” at the end of a word makes it plural. It’s not English, so adding an “S” at the end makes it wrong.