LIVE DEBATE: Is the KJV Readable Today?

[@ilovecats9336]

That was the most polite debate, I have ever seen. Setting a good example for the rest of us.

[@okguy7526]

"It takes a preacher to explain the meaning." Isn't that kinda the whole reason Tyndale started translating the Bible into English in the first place? So the plowboy didn't have to rely on the clergy? Mark, you did a great job, but the arguments from the other side really just defeated themselves tonight.

[@MM-jf1me]

That's what I was gathering from the opening statement, too: it doesn't matter if any of us laypeople can understand the Bible ourselves, because we'll always have our priests and clergy to rightly explain it to us. What a reassuring message to receive from someone who understands the original biblical languages! Who needs any English translation of the Bible as long as we have preachers? 🙄

[@tjmaverick1765]

I agree. This is what prompted my opening question to Dr. Haifley

[@WiscoMike]

@@tjmaverick1765 I had higher expectations of Haifley than what he delivered. He seemed unprepared and was too accommodating until the end.

[@lifegracefaith]

Not sure if the plowboy read English or German, etc...

[@Are_You_Sure_Bro]

Dr. Ward, you did an outstanding job. Very well done.

[@markwardonwords]

Thank you kindly!

[@thepreacher6648]

DOCTOR Ward. What is he a doctor of? He is ignorant of Satan's devices.

[@ojntk]

​​Loved this! Until I left KJVOism I hadn't realized how many times I misunderstood God's Word because of the language of the KJV.

[@jonathanmelton9801]

If God had not preserved His Word but here and there and everywhere and not completely, we would be without hope.

[@classicchristianliterature]

@@jonathanmelton9801people were without hope completely before 1611?

[@WiscoMike]

@@classicchristianliterature in large part, yes, because aside from illiteracy they didn't have a Bible of their own to read and discover Christ. Bibles were not mass produced or confined to church buildings and people were dependent on a priest or pastor to tell them about God rather than having their own relationship with God.

[@classicchristianliterature]

@@WiscoMike Christ has been building His church for 2000 years. On the day of Pentecost, 3000 were added to the church. Not one of them had a KJV. Tertullian, Irenaeus, Polycarp, Justin Martyr, Augustine, Anselm, Aquinas, Luther, Calvin, Zwingli, Bullinger… all of these Christians who God used, no King James. The printing press was a great help to the church, as was Martin Luther’s German translation, the Geneva Bible…etc. Church history didn’t start in 1611.

[@fraukeschmidt8364]

​@@WiscoMikeStill doesn't mean they were without hope. Yes, we are more privileged nowadays because a far greater percentage of people are literate. But an illiterate person can still hear the gospel and believe. The apostles encouraged the churches to preach and teach the Word and this went on throughout the history of Christianity. Sadly, for many centuries, the true preaching of the gospel in people's vernacular languages was rare. Thankfully, all that changed thanks to the Reformation and the increase in literacy.

[@thedogbarber]

You did outstanding Mark. You're a true pro. May eyes be opened.

[@WiscoMike]

Laughable.

[@markwardonwords]

Thank you, brother.

[@RevDavidReyes]

@@WiscoMike Don’t laugh at yourself, friend. It’s sad.

[@WiscoMike]

@@RevDavidReyes you think you're creative, but actually you're pathetic.

[@WiscoMike]

@@markwardonwords I think you prey on malleable, weak-minded individuals who aren't grounded in faith enough to see the misguidedness of your positions. The KJV elevates the reader rather than debase the text that is the foundation of Christianity in the English speaking World and the book that unified and shaped our nation. You're "readability" position and argument is adolescent and immature and in a broader context a distraction from the Great Commission because you're focused on minutiae instead of mission.

[@losthylian]

I was frustrated by the opening statement, where he said little about readability except "it's okay if common people can't understand it all", and couldn't help but take potshots at underlying text. Regardless, I was thrilled that the discussion was characterized by grace! An answer to many prayers, I am certain! Now if only the comment section could follow suit... 😬

[@markwardonwords]

I must agree about the surprise.

[@mikehopper1674]

It’s also crazy at the hour and 39 minute mark he said don’t take a preacher’s or dictionaries word on what something means. So basically, he’s saying we cannot be certain about God’s word.

[@mikehopper1674]

@@markwardonwordsat the risk of sounding uncharitable, I’m not the least bit surprised coming from someone who is KJVO.

[@adamykim]

Great job brothers. Thank you both for handling this matter with grace.

[@tugbankert6581]

Dan's rebuttal to Dr. Ward's opening statement is spot on and absolutely proves the need for contemporary English Bible translations. He mentioned that Dr. Ward helped the audience to understand the King James Bible, which was true. The reason they now understand the KJV is because of those modern translations. Its a good thing they exist. All of these trusted Bibles help us to take the WORD and put it in our hearts and meditate on the WORD. Let's not throw away the KJV, but let's not also reject contemporary translations so that we miss out on the WORD being fully understood the best we can.

[@WiscoMike]

@@tugbankert6581 your statement is illogical if you are saying that they only understand the KJV because of other translations availability. If they are KJV only they wouldn't be referring to lesser translations to find clarity. The KJV is clear on its face without a handicap ramp to rightly divide the words of truth.

[@tugbankert6581]

@WiscoMike I'm glad you knew what I was saying. Even KJV only Christians admit that modern versions help to clear up words they didn't know they didn't know. Dan conceded to that point.

[@A1611KJV]

@@tugbankert6581if they admit that, then they are not KJV only Christians. Simple logic.

[@faithmatterspodcast]

Why is it Dan and Dr. Ward? Just curious.

[@shaunjulian8062]

Brother Mark, my wife and I prayed for you prior to and throughout your debate. What a fantastic job you did with the Spirit's help! This was a rare opportunity to limit the scope of the discussion away from the TC debate. God bless you for hard work and years!

[@PieceOfMyMind.]

This was quite an eye-opening experience. I now see how reading a version of the Bible that clarifies the Word of God in my language is important vs. relying on a preacher that may or may not clarify the archaic words of the KJV translation to provide me with understanding of God's Word. Thank you for your work and insight.

[@stefanhenning40]

I'm very excited to watch this! Thank you so much for participating in this debate Dr. Ward.

[@whattheheckification]

I went to watch this same debate over on the King James Bible research council youtube channel and was very disheartened by the comments. King James Onlyism breaks my heart as a Christian. It’s crazy how Satan can use people’s stubbornness and preferred translations to confuse and divide us.

[@markwardonwords]

My wife said the same.

[@femiwilliams7906]

After seeing this post, I went to have a brief read through on the comments on the Bible research council KZbin page and I've concluded that KJV only folks can't be reasoned with.

[@markwardonwords]

@@femiwilliams7906The Very Online KJVOs frequently/usually cannot be. But individual KJV-Only brothers spoke to me courteously in person after the debate.

[@femiwilliams7906]

@@markwardonwords Glad to hear you were warmly received after the debate. In general, it seems people online tend to be more unkind than are in person... Sadly, I've recently decided to move on from a KJV only-ish church after attending for over a year. It has been really hard to stay committed there because of other issues, but the KJV only-ism issue was a major stumbling block.

[@WiscoMike]

@@markwardonwords if you love your wife like you claimed to love the King James Bible, are you equally critical and fault finding of her? When you stated that you grew up with and love the King James Bible, you seemed to me to lack credibility. If you loved the King James Bible and it's role in historical Reformation and present Christianity you wouldn't be making the declarations that you do. I felt you were being dishonest and trying to ingratiate yourself to the audience. Deceitful might be a good descriptor. John 1:1 claims Christ is the Word of God, if so, is the Word that we have perfect and a reflection of Christ? When the balance of Heaven is weighed, do you think your positions hold weight in souls saved for eternity or is this just an exercise in self-aggrandizement?

[@masonrawls4017]

Well done, Mark! Clear and God glorifying.

[@markwardonwords]

Thank you kindly!

[@redfive-ny9np]

Bro. Mark, your work has been influential in my leaving KJVO. And this debate was really the final nail in the coffin. Thanks for all you do.

[@markwardonwords]

I appreciate that. I’d love to hear the story, either here or privately.

[@redfive-ny9np]

@@markwardonwords what is a good way to get in contact with you? It’s a bit of a long story.

[@susanshock-x1f]

I enjoyed this so much, and it spoke my heart. For years, so many things, at times, I have never understood in the KJV Bible, but growing up on it, I feel like I am sinning when I go to another Bible. I really do. This has made me laugh. I am thankful to know it is ok, to look at other versions after hearing Pastor Mark Ward. But the Debate itself, was so informative. Both Pastors were wonderful. I am thankful for the opportunity to have seen this. Thank you

[@markwardonwords]

Thanks for sharing!

[@carolbarlow8896]

Many are making comments about who won the debate but I think this misses the point. If you’ve ever known someone who is stuck in KJV jail the fear of touching a more understandable Bible can be overwhelming not to mention the guilt if you did try one. If you’re married to a staunch KJVonlyist and you’re not allowed to read another Bible for yourself or to your children the unnecessary control is damaging for you and your kids. Please, commenters, try to see this as something beyond an academic debate. To the men out there, please try to see this from a woman’s perspective. The goal is an understandable Bible and freedom from jail. This goes beyond the academics. Thank you and God bless. Well done Mark. Thank you.

[@tinybibles]

Thank you for doing this debate! The live quiz determined the winner of the debate. Once those results were in, the debate was over. No matter what arguments are made, the poll proved that the KJV is, in fact, not sufficiently readable. QED.

[@amptown1]

What a beautiful debate! This was so refreshing! Neither of you got angry, mean, frustrated or nasty. All debates should be like this.

[@markwardonwords]

That was one of my specific prayer requests. Dan was a genuine and sincere gentleman, and I pray I was the same!

[@kaltech04]

Very cordial and informative debate. I will say, thanks to Mark’s work I became more interested in the KJV, and just finished my first full read-through of it a few weeks ago. I was using a bible that had many of the archaic words and false friends marked in the footnotes, but I’m sure I missed many others. There were sections where I really struggled, and others where I felt like the meaning was jumping out to me more than it had before. Overall, I thoroughly enjoyed the KJV. I don’t plan on using it as my main translation, but will continue to use it for comparisons to other translations and daily devotional.

[@JerrySisto]

Dr. Haifley was asked toward the end of the debate what would it take to update the KJV. He said it would take many men with the same passion to update as little as possible. It has been done!. The NKJV. It took130 men who love the KJV 7 years of labor.

[@markwardonwords]

I agree completely. But the NKJV has suffered from a forty-year campaign of disinformation and discrediting. The only way King James and TR defenders will trust a King James update is if they do it themselves from the beginning.

[@MrPCApps]

God be thanked for this debate, both of you did will. It helps us navigate through all the complexities of word of God. Thank you bothin my eye you both won.

[@arturoecheverria9865]

Mark, your heart was abundantly clear in this debate. I think there are more than a few people who walked away from hearing this debate not a little more edified about the KJV and the blessings of modern English translations. You have my utmost respect by your clarity, careful use of words, and your desire to maintain Christ-like peace.

[@WiscoMike]

@@arturoecheverria9865 you're kidding right? He made pointed and directed attacks on the debate floor claiming that the KJVRC do more research. Mark was completely condescending. The other side was too polite. What would be more entertaining, and I true debate fashion, would be for each side to argue their other's position.

[@fraukeschmidt8364]

​@@WiscoMikeCompletely condescending? I'm sorry, I think you heard only what you wanted to hear. Yes, Mark got a couple of digs in, but so did Dr Haifley. Otherwise, I thought they both showed lovingkindness and openness.

[@mattwilly7959]

I met for a while with international students doing bible studies, it was difficult enough at times explaining words in an easier to read traslation like the NLV, it would've been almost Impossible to do so with the KJV, thank you for your work in helping others be confident they can read the bible in modern english and that it has been properly translated

[@markwardonwords]

Thanks for sharing!

[@tdok6487]

You did a great job Mark - very clear information and a loving heart for God’s Word. It was nice to see a debate where people treat each other with respect.

[@Agben35]

Great job Mark and Dan….great discussion. I appreciate the venue, college, moderator…. And the spirit in which this discussion was had. Very fruitful in my opinion.

[@anyanyanyanyanyany3551]

My goodness, while this was a calm and well-mannered debate, Haifley kept moving the goalposts (or adding new ones) by mentioning the "missing verses". Textual criticism wasn't part of this debate, but he just simply couldn't let it go.

[@dustinburlet7249]

agreed

[@eclipsesonic]

Well done, Mark. You did an excellent job in this debate. I pray that eyes will be opened and that God will continue to bless you. 🙏🙏

[@wayneanderson4259]

Awesome debate! As a former KJV Only Christian, I have learned so much from Dr. Ward and the work that he does. I really appreciate the tone of the debate and the fact that it did not get heated. And lastly, thanks to Denny, my KJV only brother in Christ who put me on to the debate by saying did you hear what that Mark Ward said in the debate about the King James Bible? After watching the entire debate, I realized that Dr. Ward did not say anything that my brother Denny said that he did. Lol! In defense of Denny, I asked him if he watched the debate and he said no he was told about it. Well there you go.

[@markwardonwords]

Thank you for this.

[@JoshB882]

Well done! You were very articulate and made great points backed with facts and research. I have learned a lot, and have even changed my views on the use of different bible translation due to your work. Thank you!

[@markwardonwords]

Glad it was helpful!

[@petercarter8455]

This was the first time I have heard a polite discussion from the KJV-only camp. Mark, your passion and love was clear throughout the whole time.

[@Yesica1993]

Aaaaw, "Shout to the Lord" at the end! Glad I could finally search it out. I remembered the tune but not the words. Sheesh, I must be getting old. We sang it a million times at my old church!

[@bmorgan595]

Finished listening. Good demeanor of both. I appreciated the interaction. I would have enjoyed more cross examination time. Well done, Brother Mark!

[@markwardonwords]

Thanks for listening!

[@PastorJohnsPerspective]

What an outstanding debate! Probably one of the kindest, most gracious debates from both sides that I have ever witnessed. Having been raised and spent most of my life as KJVO, I have recently begun to explore the possibilities that other translations are not only viable, but perhaps Superior? Dr. Ward, your work has been very influential in coming to that frame of mind. In fact, I asked my 12-year-old daughter last night , why she did not read the Bible. Mind you, she has only ever owned, read, or been taught from a King James Bible. Her response was “a lot of the words just don’t make sense, Dad. I think if I understood it better, I would read it more.”

[@markwardonwords]

Wow. That really is profound.

[@RebeccaABrock]

Thank you, Mark, for your careful argumentation and clear demonstration of James 3 wisdom in your tone!

[@markwardonwords]

Many thanks, Rebecca! I didn't meet you at MBU, but I was glad you could drop in at the BFS.

[@honsville]

Beautiful debate, loved it. Thank yall both. :)

[@theepitomeministry]

Excellent presentation in this debate Dr. Ward!

[@salvadaXgracia]

Great debate! You obviously won hands down. I loved how kind you both were but honestly, you stuck to the topic at hand and made sensible points while your opponent has to fill his time with jokes or other topics. Even when he did speak to the topic, his arguments fail at the slightest examination. I am shocked that he used the argument that Jesus spoke in parables so therefore the Bible today should be in a confusing language?! Jesus concealed his identity so he could go to the cross to pay for our sins at Passover, and not be forcibly made king on one hand nor be killed prematurely on the other. Jesus said when he was lifted up on the cross, then he could draw all men, and no longer hide his identity. He told his apostles after his resurrection and Pentecost to preach the gospel everywhere and even gave then supernatural power to speak the various languages of the peoples so they could understand (not so they could be confused). I was surprised that he tried to use Philip and the eunich as an argument that preachers need to also be on the spot Bible translators. Philip explained the Scripture to the eunich; he was not translating it from even more ancient to contemporary language for him. I thought it was a tangent when he said the plow boy couldnt read. What's his point? That lay people should not read the Bible for themselves but should only listen to expert preachers at church? He says people need to be educated but then insinuates the plow boy doesn't need the Bible in his language becuase he cant read anyway (and I guess he never will?) Once the plow boy could read, then he needed a Bible in his language not just the Vulgate. Most English speaking teens and adults today can read. Our language. Our dialect. He says we should just trust preachers, but go study the Bible for ourselves. Yet he contradicts himself as he wants to deny people the tools to study for themselves, namely a translation into their own language. I understand the temptation for a KJVO to keep attacking the underlying text of most modern versions which are shorter especially by a couple large sections. I understand your desire to set that aside entirely. But on the other hand, to the passage you quoted, the Bible itself says it's better to speak 5 intelligible words than a thousand in an unknown tongue. The modern versions are the "5 words"- shorter but intelligible- while the KJV is the "thousand words in an unknown tongue.

[@tb.9kba93g]

It's also not just a question of whether the plow boy might learn to read, but also of if he hears the Bible read in the evening by his sister who can read, will he be able to understand the words? For Protestants in particular, it's an important tenet that the Word of the Lord be comprehensible to everybody, because the Gospel is capable of being understood by even the simplest if it is only put into words they can grasp. (I see that as an argument in favor of even colloquial versions designed for reading out loud, so long as they are used for their proper purpose and not treated as deep study tools.)

[@ArtDunham2]

I so enjoyed the debate. Both of you were kind and respectful of each other. However, you certainly had the better argument. I love your heart, Brother!

[@carben9143]

What a wonderful debate Mark. Well done sir, well done!

[@andrewingram4289]

This was great Mark! You are a blessing sir! Keep up the good work

[@a.w.virella7011]

Dr. Ward, great job, good scholarly debate, may the Lord use this debate to his glory. Soli deo Gloria

[@bmorgan595]

Mark, great job. I'm still listening...but gasped at 48:00 ish mark, when he applauded how clear you were in explaining a few false friends, and then declared, "see, now you know your King James Bible....it takes a preacher to know the sense......because there are words that there is no easy way to communicate....." Very concerning.

[@Alex-mg7yc]

That was an amazing discussion and a good summary of both sides. Something I will refer people to when having a similar discussions. Thanks Mark!

[@customstoryteller]

When he went to country music I was like, “I got false friends in low places. . .” 😏

[@bretclement3197]

Fun fact, if you listen to the lyrics in modern English the beer chases away depression but in Elizabethan it’s used as wound disinfectant.

[@WorldviewOutdoors]

I cant help but comment three times Haifley just couldn’t resist Text Critical comments: 23:43, 25:48, and 51:11 as examples. I appreciate you function key comments and not getting off track.

[@markwardonwords]

He did better on that than almost anyone I could possibly have debated! But, yes, he couldn’t resist a couple comments!

[@ora_et_labora1095]

Great debate, in many ways, and the production is on point.

[@markwardonwords]

That production was really something!

[@AaronSpence-y1x]

Thanks Mark!

[@markwardonwords]

My pleasure!

[@benanderson4118]

I've heard other preachers say that the whole Bible was not meant to be understood. I find that to be a horrifying thought. It's like God is messing with our minds. The Bible communicates God's word to us, and we must listen and learn.

[@AndreaWhoGoesByAndrea]

It just about blew my mind in the very first opening statement when the pastor Dan H conflated Jesus' concealing truth from the lost with Christians, who have the Holy Spirit, not understanding the Bible. I don't think he even realized what it sounded like he was saying, there. He did make clarifying statements later about the Spirit growing Christians' understanding as they mature, but still... the initial comments were jarring.

[@kristofferrodas6389]

This was an exemplary debate. This is the way debates should be done by Christians. Well done.

[@markwardonwords]

Many thanks!

[@jacobwjones]

Bravo. Great conversation, and excellent points Mark.

[@AndreaWhoGoesByAndrea]

Dr. Ward, congrats on a well-spoken, well-reasoned, respectful, and professional debate! I don't know what the response from the other side of the aisle will be, but to me it seemed clear that God aided you to communicate well through any nervousness, hit your main points right on target, and avoid red herrings. I know there were many prayers going up for this debate, and I hope you can relax briefly now. 😊

[@smbamaboy]

Hats off to Haifley and Ward for both being able to be passionate about their subjects and still be polite and loving and forwarding the truth they both want to honor God, I wish other Christians, politicians and pundants would do the same.

[@FaithFounders]

I would like to thank both debate participants. The purpose of a debate is to flesh out ideas and flaws in the positions of each participant with the intent to both inform and persuade those who are listening to come over, to some degree, their position. May I also say that none of us, regardless of whether we hold a KJV only position or a multiple translation position, should ever view a debate as a sporting event with a winner and loser. What we should do is listen intently, with sincerity, to the positions of each participant, and LEARN whatever we can from both of them, so long as what we learn is for the glory of Christ. That is the chief end of man: to glorify God and enjoy Him forever. When we listen to a debate, we should be praying that the Lord would teach us something from both Christian brothers engaging in a debate like this one. Brother Mark and Haifley! Thank you for modeling brotherly love for one another on a topic that is so contentious within Conservative Christianity. I refuse to crown either of you "the winner". Instead, I would like to exalt the Lord Jesus Christ, whom I believe was honored and glorified through your debate with one another. You both have set an example that all other Christians, no matter which side of the debate with which they agree, should seek to emulate. If one's first response is to slander another brother as a heretic, unbeliever, etc. in contradiction to what the very translators of the KJV would have done, then you are in the flesh and need to repent. If one believes that those who defend the KJV are also uneducated buffoons from the backwoods and treats them as something less than a true brother and sister in Christ, then you are in the flesh and need to repent. There have been great controversies among genuine brothers and sisters in Christ for hundreds of years about a wide variety of issues within orthodox Christianity. I would advise one thing. The scripture states explicitly that we are to judge with just and equal measures, we are to judge without respect of persons (and without respect to our own "crowd"), that we are to love one another and our neighbor (a command), and to not level an accusation against an elder (a teaching authority within the church) except it be by 2-3 witnesses, and it had better be backed up with a scriptural foundation (direct statements in scripture, not inferences or allusions from scripture which are subjective by nature). "By this shall all men know that ye are my disciples, if ye have love one toward another." Regardless of which side of this issue you take, can you say that you are doing that to your brother who holds the opposite position from you? If not, you need to repent and be reconciled to your brother. To partake of the Lord's Supper(table) without repenting and being reconciled to your brother is to partake of it unworthily, which the apostle Paul gave a dire warning against in 1 Corinthians. Let us remember that even in a debate and issue as contentious as this one, our God has explicitly commanded us "Be ye holy, for I the Lord am Holy". We will give an account to him of every idle word spoken. Let us be slow to speak and bear the fruit of the Spirit toward those brothers who disagree with us. When you engage with a brother who disagrees with you are you bearing "love, joy, peace, longsuffering, gentleness, goodness, faith, Meekness, temperance" when dealing with them? If not, you are not abiding in Christ. Stop allowing your flesh to divide the body of Christ. You will stand before Him to give an account of how you persecuted the very brothers who were on your side. Do not forget that. Let us all fall on our faces before our Creator and plead with him to give us the mind of Christ that we may act toward one another in such a way that unbelievers will see our love toward one another and glorify our Father who is in heaven. If you treat a true brother in Christ like unbelievers treat them, what does that say about you and your spiritual maturity? Repent, for the kingdom of God is at hand.

[@markwardonwords]

Amen. I believe my brother Dan has paid a price for being kind to me. But I also believe he will reap a reward.

[@cmbailey13]

Good stuff, brother. I’m very thankful for your pastoral heart in this debate.

[@ThePeoplesWill]

Mark I am praying that the KJBC would seriously consider your offer to make the KJV intelligibility to the highest standard possible. I sincerely hope they will do this. The world needs this. I want to add, that as a pastor I am saddened at the response he gave to his members who were struggling with readability. The answer "learn more" is not proper, sufficient, or wise. I struggle with this same issue at our church, where new converts struggle with the KJV. This is an important issue that needs to be handled with the highest of urgency, sensitivity, and respect. How can we disciple those who don't understand (or can't) themselves? How can we disciple when we ourselves are teaching things we do not fully understand. Lord Jesus help us.

[@markwardonwords]

Right!

[@AustinBurch1]

Great job, Mark! Love the videos, I’m definitely going to be getting your books.

[@markwardonwords]

Awesome! Thank you!

[@theophilusmann7869]

Mark, you exceeded my expectations in your arguments and responses. You are having an impact.

[@markwardonwords]

An answer to many prayers, and not just my own.

[@theydontknowmeson007]

Great debate. It went as i expected. Well done, Mark.

[@sillyrabbi64]

OK, Dr. Ward...I want a gospel album (38:01). That's an impressive baritone!

[@sbs8331]

I just listened (MP3 download) to this and was very impressed. Both Dr. Haifley and Dr. Ward communicated their positions clearly and cordially. Their demeanor provides an example that other theological debaters would do well to emulate. A couple of minor critiques (one for each side): I felt Dr. Ward went "a bridge too far" with his implication that giving (only) a KJV Bible to one's child is a sin. There are enough actual sins documented in Scripture for us to avoid without formulating one like this. It can cause unnecessary offense and thus negate the influence his otherwise cogent arguments may engender. Dr. Haifley's assertion that the "plowboy" example is invalid due to his supposed illiteracy is beside the point. Tyndale made the statement while surely knowing the situation. It actually strengthens Dr. Ward's position. Someone who only hears the word (Rom 10:17) is in even greater need of a clear translation as he will have access to neither the context nor a dictionary. Thanks for a very informative debate.

[@markwardonwords]

Look for a video where he and I clarify together a few things!

[@chanwitkepha]

I'm not Native English (I'm Thai People, Born in Thailand). So, I'm use Thai Bible as primary Translation. However, I'm also using KJV + Strong when I read my primary translation and get confused. However, I also pick up NKJV to my church too when I want to use Modern English Translation in Church. Yes, KJV is incredibly good translation, but their English Language is old, many words meaning is change and I cannot find them in regular English Thai Dictionary. That's why I also use NKJV too. For my personal study, I have Bible Analyzer Application for Windows 11. It has KJV + Strong and Webster 1812 Dictionary and TSKe that optimize for studying in KJV. But when I share something about Words of God to other people. I must use Bible Translation in my language or some good Modern English Translation to communicate with them.

[@lannyfaulkner6697]

Thank you for this. I was blessed and edified by this debate. Blessings!

[@markwardonwords]

I'm so glad!

[@328am]

This was great and the Body of Christ would be all the better if we had more of this. I would LOVE to hear a debate on how Bibliology affects and influences each viewpoint. You can’t argue with God.

[@Simdumise]

This was a great discussion and the spirit manifested was very Christlike and cordial. Dr. Mark Ward is very clear in his thinking and in articulating his view. He is very disciplined in sticking to the point at hand and he helped me appreciate his contributions. Dr. Dan Haifley seems to rely very much the slippery slope fallacy and his position seems to be based more on fear than on sound reasoning. Of course he does sight past instances where what he fears has happened but I think Dr. Ward has done his best to assure that he is willing to make certain concessions just to have a TR translation that is more readable for a contemporary audience.

[@dolanridgecommunitychurch7433]

Great respectful debate between two brothers in Christ.

[@dough3821]

I thought you both did a great job! I am KJV-preferred, but your arguments gave me a lot of food for thought. I do own a few other translations, and I definitely believe some hard-core KJV-onlyists get so carried away with this issue.

[@markwardonwords]

Many thanks! I just want people to understand their Bibles!

[@keithfuson7694]

Great job Mark..You're absolutely right.

[@andrewefting8622]

I wish the debate format would have allowed for more interaction, but I still think Mark was able to counter the few points made by the other side. BTW, it is not just vocabulary that makes the KJV difficult, it is the very awkward sentence structure that you find throughout the text. Difficult phraseology, obsolete words, and false friends all make for a very intimidating and difficult reading experience that largely makes the plowboy dependent on the preacher to understand their Bible. The congregation will remain simple in their understanding of God's word and very few will be true Bereans. Part of my goal as a teacher is to help those who listen to me learn how to study the Bible for themselves. The way I work through a passage or a topic is something I hope my listeners will be able to do on their own for whatever topic or passage they are interested in. The first step in all that, is understanding the words and thoughts of the text.

[@guyesmith]

Man, you’re a humble genius.

[@Kai_Theos_en_ho_Logos]

It grieves me that in 2024 -- with all the burgeoning societal issues challenging the Church in the West -- that folks like Mark are still having to contend with topics like this. Anxiety and suicide are on the rise. The identity crisis has never been more apparent. And we have an entire generation which is trading off meaning and purpose for technological convenience. Lord, help us get past our pride so we can deal with weightier matters together.

[@tony.biondi]

Excellent work, Mark. Well done.

[@markwardonwords]

Many thanks!

[@WesternPastor]

What a blessing to see the grace given both ways in this debate. Truly iron sharpening iron.

[@jmr10276]

You did an amazing job. Really, that was wonderful

[@markwardonwords]

Thank you very much!

[@RobL194]

Brother Ward - thank you for your effort and care in this endeavor. Are you open to another future debate on this topic? I would be interested in seeing someone who is more organized and articulate meet your points head on, versus what happened here. Granted, I would be much more interested in both sides working together to prepare a KJV update than I would be with continued debate. The recent X/Twitter exchange of Pastor Shakour's was a bit disheartening, since Joe is perhaps the most reasonable and charitable contemporary proponent of the KJV position. Yes, there is much Gospel sharing work to be done, but can we walk and chew gum at the same time? If we are going to continue insisting on the exclusive use of the choices made by the King James translators-Joe's emphasis on the choices-then we must insist on preparing an update that brings those choices into the language we currently speak.

[@markwardonwords]

I fully agree. Joe is tops. And I’m open to more debate.

[@G.D.9]

Great performance Mark!

[@markwardonwords]

Many thanks, Samuel Johnson!

[@HelloFromSaints]

Mark, it looks like God answered your petitions! The debate was kind and enlightening, and many people heard you. Thank you for all your hard work! I have a response to one of your questions. You asked Dan how someone can know to look up a word they don't know they don't know. He sort of said that they will be guided by the Holy Spirit (notably, he didn't say the Holy Ghost). He should have been more firm on that point. That is a powerful truth that I firmly believe. "If any of you lack wisdom, let him ask of God, that giveth to all men liberally, and upbraideth not; and it shall be given him. But let him ask in faith, nothing wavering." Your response to that clearly shows the practical problems with that approach. Many faithful Christians misunderstand Bible passages. And your original question remains. Whether we ask God or a dictionary, how can we know that we lack wisdom if we think we understand? As you pointed out, a Christian shouldn't need to look up every word just in case. Here is my answer that I wish Dan had said: Christians who believe that the KJV is the best (or even authoritative) translation should simply read another translation along side to help them identify the words they don't realize they misunderstand. They can then check their readings with the OED or the original languages, and they can always have the security of returning to their trusted text. If KJVO churches simply became KJV Preferred, I think this civil war would solve itself. We could have our beloved Bible translation and understand it too.

[@bpetersguitar]

Nicely done!

[@markwardonwords]

Thank you! Cheers!

[@Beefcake1982]

Mark! That was amazing!

[@markwardonwords]

Glad you enjoyed it!

[@penprop01]

Great Video!👏🏽👏🏽👏🏽👍🏽

[@markwardonwords]

Many thanks!

[@brucemcqueen5395]

I will never understand why people feel like they can only read one translation of the bible. There are so many good ones out there and readily available for free online and on bible apps like you version. Pick two or three and enjoy comparing them.

[@capnsalty0200]

Thank you Mark, Jim and Jim's dad were and are very close friends. While I severed in the Chicago area with Child Evangelism Fellowship, I was the treasurer for the IFCA International which Quentin Rd was a member. My wife and I were members at Cicero Bible Church were I was an elder. We used the NKJV while Dr Scudder used the KJV I liked the KJV. I used a Thomson Chain Reference, which was nice because on the chains it would give a word help in the margin that would explain some of the "false friends", but I know use the NKJV with "Olive Tree Bible App." What is nice about that is just by tapping a word I brings up the concordance definition. I do follow your channel on KZbin but also follow the King James Research Council also. I do use other translation and am not a KJV Onlyist, but I did tend to lean heavy towards the KJV but because to you now use many translations. I do not care for the Critical Text versions so recently purchased a NKJV single column wide margin. Again thank you for this debate, have a blessed day.

[@airiksknifereviews9548]

Lots of feelings and emotional connection to the old KJV are all I heard. It's why I was stuck in KJV only view for far too long.

[@matthewbrown4895]

I just want to hear Mark debate more. The eloquence and wit were beautifully paired. I think there was a more clear winner, but honestly, I just hope and pray that the body of Christ is the real winner and that this gets us one step closer towards unity.

[@Moqlnkn]

If you go to other channels with clips from this debate, you'll find very different opinions. I highly encourage you to seek conversation with both sides.

[@matthewbrown4895]

Of course you will get different opinions. But when it is stated that they arnt going to talk about textual differences and Dan brings it up a couple of times and he doesn't really prove the positive for the KJV being readable, only that he doesn't like other translations, in a debat setting, that isn't a win.

[@kainech]

This was an outstanding debate, kind and courteous. Congratulations. I think you won this pretty handily. Dr. Haifley seemed completely unprepared, but it may be the weakness of the position. I think some of the points are defensible, but he didn't succeed. He seems like the KJVOs I've met in the past (outside the internet). They were all kind and considerate. It doesn't make the position stronger, but it makes him quite likable.

[@markwardonwords]

I agree. I came away liking him more. We had kind fellowship at a wonderful dinner (he paid for!) before the debate.

[@TheNinjaCoffee]

I loved the debate, both brothers we're charitable and respectful.. something we should all emulate when we dialog with brothers and sisters. I really wanted pizza after I heard that timer.

[@theretroreseller2434]

The quiz was a mic drop for this debate.

[@catpocalypsenow8090]

Most people read the 1789 revised KJV and not the 1611 original version, so even the KJV onlyists don't read the original KJV.

[@bibleprotector]

There is no "1789" revised KJV.

[@Kai_Theos_en_ho_Logos]

He got the date wrong but he's correct in the point he's making. (I'm fairly certain you already knew the actual date and revision he was referring to. Just being cheeky.) @catpocalypsenow is clearly referring to the 1769 Blayney revision. Since this is Mark Ward's channel, I'll quickly point out that he also handles the topic in his book, 'Authorized' (Kindle loc. 1245). Btw -- Great job, Mark. 🫡

[@marthaj67]

@@bibleprotector With respect, "bibleprotector", may I recommend a book titled, "Taming The Fingers" by Jeff Johnson? It might help you "protect" your _Christian witness_ on social media.

[@stefanhenning40]

I just finished watching the debate. I don't believe that my observations are particularly important, yet I have a few thoughts nonetheless: 1. This was a very cordial debate, notably so when compared to some of those conducted by other Christians on this subject in the past. 2. The KZbin chat could have been better and more charitable on both sides, which was disappointing. 3. Dr. Haifley used a lot of anecdotal evidence and pathos-centric argumentation, which can have a great effect when speaking to the average Joe but is less effective when debating formally. 4. While Dr. Ward's debate survey had clear validity issues, as noted by Dr. Haifley, it was more effective in the debate at establishing a base of mutual understanding of the problem. 5. Dr. Ward used a more precise and logical flow of argumentation, which helped get his point across. 6. Dr. Ward stayed on topic more often than Dr. Haifley. 7. Dr. Haifley did bring up a good point of internal consistency and linguistic continuity within scripture. Dr. Ward did not have adequate time to address this point, although I suspect he has a rebuttal. 8. Dr. Haifley admitting to giving a KJV to a new believer is shocking. He later turned it around on Dr. Ward to search for a careful retraction of his previous remarks, which was disappointing. It showed a need for more awareness on Dr. Haifley's part, and I was pleased to see Dr. Ward stand his ground. Although this comment is long, I want to acknowledge the lovingkindness both men took into the debate. This was a fantastic example of two brothers in Christ cleanly disagreeing and presenting their side. Although I am partial, Dr. Ward won the debate, if not by the salience of his argument, then by its delivery. Dr. Haifley did a great job, too! I pray he continues his diligent ministry and work at the KJB Research Council to bring God's word and the Gospel to those in need.

[@validcore]

#7. Are you saying it's wrong to give a KJV to a new believer? Also I assume you're talking about the question for Mark about him saying it's a sin to give a KJV to a child. What's your thoughts on it being a sin?

[@stefanhenning40]

@@validcore I am saying that giving the KJV to a new believer is wrong, especially if they're a child. I was in that boat; I wanted to know God's word but had no familial support. A KJV-o family friend gave me a Bible, and it was utterly incomprehensible as a 12 y/o new to the faith. It drove me away for years because I didn't know other options existed. Once I started reading a modern translation (the ESV) and attending a church (Lutheran) as a teenager, I was finally opened to the faith. I don't know if it's a sin in the strictest sense, but at the very least, giving new believers the KJV as their only translation option is irresponsible. That's my two cents anyway. Although I must say, as an adult, I love the KJV! It's just not appropriate for children and those new to the faith.

[@davidsteinart]

The story he gave in cross-examination about a woman literally coming to him and telling him, I cannot understand the Bible in Elizabethan English, and him passing right by it and assuming she just needs to learn it, is heartbreaking. What could possibly be the justification for requiring this of the least of these. The reality is, regardless of The Upfront recognitions that the text is the issue, or that Ruckmanism is false, there has to be some sort of unspoken assumption being clung to that there is something magical or uniquely authoritative about only the KJV and/or that other versions are corrupt and dangerous. Otherwise, no one who remotely had a pastor's heart would be able to endure that conversation with that woman and come to the conclusion he did. I definitely don't question the man's heart. He seems sincere and I really appreciated his cordial manner. It just makes me sad that's so many sincere people have this fundamental misunderstanding and to see how it plays out to the injuring of tender Souls

[@markwardonwords]

RIGHT! I'm in total agreement.

[@CC-iu7sq]

Love it, Mark! Great job. I’ve spent many hours listening to theological and cross denominational debates and I must say, you debate well. I’ll provide a minor correction. James 4:17 is not to be used with what anyone may interpret as “good” aside from what was provided in the context of James. Otherwise, we run into the dangers of misusing the verse and condemn anyone who does not do what one may interpret as “good”, as being sinful. For example. Man 1: “If you don’t doorknock every neighborhood in the city to win souls to Christ for 8-12 hours a day, you’re disobedient to God” Man 2: “How so? We’re commanded to evangelize, but why such an extreme mandate” Man 1: “Because it’s a good thing to evangelize 8 hours a day. James 4:17.” End of illustration. Or, one can organize the passage in Titus of when someone seeks the office of a bishop, it’s called “A Good thing”. If we apply James 4:17 to anything we interpret as “Good”, you’re sinful if you don’t seek to pastor. Just a minor correction. I’ve debated that verse with several brothers and it’s just a little irk I get when it’s used outside of its intended meaning indicated within its context. Great stuff Mark! You represented well!

[@b__rink__]

Fantastic job brother Mark

[@markwardonwords]

Thanks for listening!

[@jacklezza5692]

1:40:50 Dr. Haifley says, "What is true for you may not be for someone else??" Relativism is what we are facing today and I would not have expected to hear that here.

[@Moqlnkn]

You have to be careful with your interpretation of it. He probably meant "What seems true for you may not seem true for someone else."

[@FaithFounders]

@@Moqlnkn Did he actually say that? Or are you interpreting what he said? Did the context around that statement support your assertion or was it too open ended where one could interpret the statement in many different ways? I surely would love to give him the benefit of the doubt and be charitable. I'm just not sure one can come down clearly on either side. I'd love to hear his explanation of that comment.

[@Moqlnkn]

@@FaithFounders We have to interpret what everybody says because we're not omniscient. The bottom line is, only God knows what he was truly trying to say at that moment. As humans, we have to be open to any reasonable possibility, because we simply do not know the true answer.

[@socksthemusicalcat]

Great debate, of course. I had a thought about one of Dan's arguments that was a very common KJVO talking point. He appeals to Genesis 3 ("Did God really say...?"), but he also rightly lauds the Bereans in Acts 17. They also essentially questioned whether God really said something (namely what Paul was preaching), but the difference was their posture and motive for asking. They were coming from a place of ignorance looking to learn and genuinely wanting to make sure that what they were believing was correct rather than knowing something to be true and intentionally casting doubt on it. Appeals to Genesis 3 poison the well and imply if not outright state that even faithful conservative Evangelical scholars know that the KJVOs are correct and are intentionally misleading people away from the truth. Really hard to have good faith discussions when that's one of the first line arguments you get right out of the gate. Less fundamentally but no less odd was the concern over new translations ruining "first mention" topics. I've always thought that principle was a wax nose at best, and if all it takes is a translator using a different word to destroy it, then that methodology is just as weak as I think it is. The KJV translators themselves intentionally used different words for little more reason than the sake of variety and it was their prerogative to do so, so one ought to criticize them as well for jeopardizing "first mention" nuggets on the altar of good prose. But even if we grant that "first mention" is a legitimate hermeneutical principle, wouldn't that be more of a "deeper" kind of analysis that isn't such a concern for an initial reading where a modern English equivalent would be significantly more effective? It sounds like more of a concern for preacher than lay people, and they ought to be able to have the discernment to weigh out that sort of thing if it's a real issue.

[@markwardonwords]

Great points. That first one I really can use.

[@dwmmx]

This is the best debate I have ever witnessed! From my perspective, Bro. Ward's case was put forth most effectively, and I am in complete agreement with it. It seemed the only ad-hom came from the KJVO side, and as is normal, that side puts itself forth as the only side that's right. I'm glad to share this with as many others as I can

[@markwardonwords]

Yes, I don't think I've seen a single ad hominem comment against Dan. I'm glad for that!

[@FaithFounders]

@@markwardonwords If only some of the KJVO commenters were as gracious as the debate opponents.

[@anthonytylernecerato4289]

Dr. Ward you did an amazing job in this debate the only issue is that your opponent was not prepared, and so it was like there was no good rebuttal. However, could you do a video reply to Thomas Ross’s overstated assertion that “there are hundreds of lines in the NA UBS text that have no manuscript support at all.”? He is still beating away at that drum, and doesn’t engage with any further discussion. He once again started on that with his debate preview video. Thank you for shining the light of Christ.

[@fraukeschmidt8364]

Dr Haifley said, "We don't dumb down the literature to the culture. We teach the culture how to read the literature." The trouble is, people in the KJV Only community AREN'T taught how to read the KJV Bible for for themselves AND understand it. They are just given the book (or told to get it) and left to run with it. No explanation, not even regarding the use of "thee, thy and thou". And no, not just God is addressed with those pronouns. Individual people are. Lastly, there ARE verses about studying the Word in other translations. I'm too lazy to find them right now. But if Psalms 1 and 119 alone do not induce and encourage thee to study the Word, I don't know how to help thee.

[@calebschaaf1555]

I’m so impressed with how you did in this debate, Mark. The hundreds of hours of preparation are obvious. One thing that strikes me is that for the KJV-onlyist, it’s well-nigh impossible to have a conversation *just* about intelligibility without dipping into textual criticism. For my wife, it was an emotional experience. She had to get over her reticence to even consider a modern translation, because even considering it is sin to many. Thanks for holding the line and freeing consciences from extra-biblical, pharisaical, and (to be frank) idolatrous standards.

[@markwardonwords]

Amen, brother. Yes, I knew beyond a shadow of a doubt that he could not limit himself to translation only. But he did far better than any KJVO I've ever known!

[@stevegroom58]

I’m perplexed at the inconsistency of KJVO advocates. Why don’t we hear them speaking KJVO English in the pulpits, in the pews and in debates. I suspect Dr. Ward himself could give a debate answer or state a position using KJV English, perplexing the opponent and the audience.

[@philtheo]

The debate itself was largely a good and cordial debate. 😊 However the comments section, or at least those over on the KJV Only channels, are, well, less than cordial! And I'm afraid to say anecdotally it seems like the vast majority of the less than cordial comments are coming from one side and only one side. For example, a couple of KJV Only proponents stated without any good reason or evidence that Mark Ward is not a genuine Christian but a false teacher, arrogant, effeminate, "quare" (which I guess means "queer"), etc. Frankly that kind of language shouldn't come out of the Christian's mouth, it is plainly not Christian charity or behavior in general. And even after I defended Ward, and called out these brothers for their unwarranted personal attacks, the KJV Only proponents replied with (paraphrasing): Even if (if!) Ward is saved, then it must've been through the KJB! So I guess anyone (like me) that learned about Christianity and repented and trusted in Jesus alone through a non-KJV Bible translation is not truly saved but at best deluded. And this seems to be a not uncommon line of thinking among some or many (not all) KJV Only proponents. Sigh. One can't reason with the unreasonable. But I hope not all are unreasonable. As such, I continue to pray that this debate changes many minds and brings truth and light rather than heat and darkness to many people. SDG.

[@losthylian]

I saw some of the comments you were involved in. I don't even know how to begin with such malicious opponents, so I typically don't even start. Not on the internet, at least!

[@philtheo]

​@@losthylianThanks, brother (or sister)! 😊 That's because you are surely wiser than I am, it probably would've been better if i I hadn't started in the first place!

[@JohnSivewright]

What I would point out about Mark, having watched many of his videos, is I've never seen him preach the Gospel, offer a personal witness for Christ, discuss apologetics, give biblical exposition, etc. I've literally only ever seen him talk about bible translations, mainly critiquing the KJV. The fact that I've never heard him offer some good Christian content that would evangelize or edify an existing believer is a huge red flag. Is the guy actually saved, or just a puffed up academic?

[@philtheo]

@@JohnSivewright I don't know Mark Ward personally, but I've also seen and read and listened to a bunch of his stuff. From what I've picked up here and there, Mark has in fact preached the gospel to many people such as young adults, non-native English speakers, low literacy English speakers, among others. He has served on short term missions to places like India where he has tried to get local congregations and local pastors and elders to better understand their Bibles. He has taught people the original biblical languages so they can teach others. He has published all sorts of educational curricula to introduce people like new Christians to the basics of the Christian faith and worldviews, which is central to apologetics. Mark has a series of books on Christianity and worldviews if I recall correctly. As an aside, Mark also has done website design and perhaps even maintians and/or hosts the theologians John Frame and Vern Poythress's shared website, which helps get out their works, and Frame and Poythress are intellectual giants and superstars within the Reformed Christian community. Anyway back to Mark. He has preached sermons and done evangelistic outreaches in various settings like churches and chapels and camps and conferences. I think he serves on the ministerial staff at his local Reformed Baptist church though I'm not entirely sure about this one so I could be mistaken here. He has discipled some people whom I've actually conversed with so I happen to know Mark has discipled or mentored them. Ironically you say he's an academic but I don't think he has ever served as a professor or similar in an academic setting, at least not to my knowledge. Most of his work has been for the local church and for salt of the earth type communities it seems to me. He worked for Logos Bible Software for many years, now he works as an editor for Crossway, which is a Christian publisher, not an academic institution. I'm sure others know Mark far better but this is mostly what I've picked up listening to him over the years. By the way, sure, one can be an arrogant puffed up academic, but one can also be an arrogant puffed up non-academic or average person. Likewise one can be a humble and gracious academic as well as a humble and gracious non-academic. Not all arrogance is necessarily intellectual arrogance.

[@JohnSivewright]

@@philtheo This certainly puts my mind a lot more at ease about Mark's relationship with the Lord Jesus and motives. But it'd sure be good if he uploaded at least one Gospel preach sometime. For all the work he does to try and help believers, reaching the unsaved with the Gospel is so much more important.

[@dougdoesit3013]

Great job!

[@markwardonwords]

Thanks!