The 1611 King James Version | Bible Review

[@betterbiblereading]

Hey friends. I appreciate all the feedback and pushback for this video. It is true that this Bible is not an exact copy of the original 1611. The font style and overall aesthetic is meant to pay homage to the original but there are differences as many have pointed out. Sorry for the confusion and thanks for watching!

[@Chandler-q1w]

I've read through this Bible over 50 times, also I've read through other versions as well before I read the Original Roman print, I've also read through the Original Gothic print 1611, The Gothic is the Father and the Roman is the Son, the Son came out from the Father, but they are the same, I would love to tell everyone all, but it's all there, I absolutely love it and will never even consider another Bible, but thanks for showing it!

[@jesusontherise]

Is it hard to read ?

[@kentuckyrex]

​@@jesusontherise it has a sort of "learning curve", for the lack of a better term. Once you've read it a while, "u=v" "f=s" "I=J" isn't so difficult.

[@Machetepacks]

This one has the u=v , f=s etc.

[@littlerobin73campey70]

@@jesusontherise I have adapted to it surprisingly well …at first I thought I would struggle and it would become more of a collective item … but I’ve truly fell in love with it… you can tell quick easily after a short while what the word is. Writting is small but I use a magnifying glass ( plastic, same size as a credit card so light as a feather) and it’s great. Infact I think that this is going to be my main reading bible. It really is beautiful and very enchanting…. The detail and everything is just incredible. Hope this helps

[@richardvoogd705]

I have a hardcover copy of a 2020 printing of this Bible, which I purchased mostly out of curiosity. I consider the Apocrypha to correspond in some ways to the bonus features of a DVD - it can be interesting reading, and occasionally even helpful, but not necessarily of the same weight as the rest of the Bible. I totally agree that a larget font size would be kinder on my eyes.

[@betterbiblereading]

How is the hardcover version holding up for you?

[@richardvoogd705]

@@betterbiblereading I hardly use it, but I'm thankful that I have it.

[@JayplayzLS]

I recommend a magnifying page to help make it easier on the eyes for reading.

[@onementality9781]

I just bought a MacArthur NKJV Study Bible and I absolutely love it. I'm going back to purchase a 1611 KJV today to reference from. Thank you for the review

[@kathleenking47]

A long time ago My boyfriend was reading from a KJB and I was reading from an NIV He was questioning the NIV the KJB is the strongest 😊👍

[@knartsylady]

@@kathleenking47 The KJB is the word of God…check this out…kzbin.info/www/bejne/goa7cqd5ls2Gm6s

[@rosalynforte509]

Hi thanks for the great Bible review. I bought this exact Holy Bible 1611 Edition King James Version and I love it. So interesting to see the original way it looked and the design is beautiful. I’m Roman Catholic and love that it has the Apocrypha in it. I own many many Bibles in all different translations and I just had to have this one. It’s iconic and classic. The way the different way the words are spelled and the use of the Roman numerals is a little bit hard to get used to. But I love this Bible. Thanks again for your review. God bless you! ✝️💜🙏🏻🙏🏻😊

[@danielaautumnyeager763]

such a beautiful bible. English is my secondary language. I use other versions cause is easy for me but, I like the king James bible because version poetic wording. ❤️

[@betterbiblereading]

Very poetic indeed!

[@Pastor-Brettbyfaith]

The version you are reviewing is not an actual facsimile. The typeface was changed for the sake of readability. The actual 1611 was 4x the size of the handsize volume you are showing. The original 1611 was also done in calligraphy. It was difficult to read. I have both editions. I also have the 1769 Blaney revision of the 1611. If you have not read the entire translators to the reader, I would encourage you to do so. The translators notes in the side column show translation choices/variants. You are welcome to look into my video collection for more information about the actual 1611 KJV. Thank you for your time and effort in doing this video.

[@betterbiblereading]

Hi Brett, thanks for your feedback and I appreciate your interest in the video. I should have mentioned that this Bible is not a facsimile compared to the original size. I have also seen the original 1611s and did know that the size was massive compared to this Bible. Thanks for mentioning that. Blessings!

[@hasbisebi7945]

@@betterbiblereading hei Better Bible Reading ! Could you please send me the first edition of 1611 King James Bible ? Send to this address :- Mr. Hasbi bin Sapawi.No 75, Jalan Punai, Kampung Malaysia Jaya, Petra Jaya, Jalan Astana,93050, KUCHING, SARAWAK, MALAYSIA.

[@hasbisebi7945]

@@betterbiblereading hei Better Bible Reading ! I will pay the costs as COD. Please, tell me your address also...tq from Hasbi bin Sapawi.

[@natturner4336]

Correct, the 1611 used gothic. This book uses Roman

[@hasbisebi7945]

@@godsbulldog1800 If Bible is the Word of God, then why your Bible has been revised so many times by humans?It's so funny that God'sWord should be revised by humans.Furthermore, who is God according to your Bible ? ha,ha,ha,hei God' Bulldog! SATAN is also God according to your Bible ( 2 CORINTHIANS 4:4 from the NLT Bible).There is no other religious book on the surface of this earth which claims that SATAN is God except your Bible.Therefore all christians are not the true followers of Jesus Christ but the followers of SATAN.Please stop lying to me and stop beating around the bush...tq.

[@Freddy-Da-Freeloadah]

HEY!!! I had one of these on the shelf: THOMAS NELSON: SHINY w/Guilt Edges I think I got it from the History Channel, as it had a sticker... A READERS BIBLE!! I was thinking of getting one. I don't like the thin pages, and small print. I am pretty sure this thing is 1/4 size the origional. I have an old Missonaries Bible from 1880 that has a lot of these pictures and stuff, but it's in a box awaiting repair (my book repair box...) THANKS!!

[@Watchmanonthewall77]

Just ordered mine from kjvstore. Im excited. I already read a more modern kjv so i hope its not a drastic jump

[@betterbiblereading]

Hope you enjoy!

[@Watchmanonthewall77]

Im sure i will. I've been reading the bible for 20 years. I've never read one so it will be a new experience.

[@stephaniesteoberl4342]

A great review. Well done. I don't know when the Apopcrypha was deleted from the Bible, but if you have a Book of Common 7 Prayer you will in reading g plan in it makes reference to some of the books of the Apopcrypha. I was given mine when I was confirmed. My church called Low Episcopal, but we were under the Dioces of The Church of England and thet still are today. I don't know if you knew this. If not, I hope you find this post interesting. God Bless . . y

[@betterbiblereading]

Hi Stephanie, thank you for watching and sharing that!

[@Byzantine_Orthodox_Christian]

The books being called "apocrypha" is strictly a protestant heresy, books like Wisdom and Maccabees are Deuterocanon (secondary canon) and were in the readings of scripture at the liturgy for 1500 years and are still used today by both Catholics and Orthodox Christians (Me). But to answer your questions some protestant big wigs apparently thought they were God and took the Deuterocanon out in the mid to late 1800's.

[@3ggaming920]

1:18 Close but the original 1611 had an entirely different font.

[@leesapo3099]

The link didn't work for me, unfortunately, I looked around for the King James V 1611 but found an ESV Version, which I found the add to be very confusing, as the video showed a different cover, white with big letter ESV - and not a good close up look at the cover, or a look inside the cover to an area, where the father can add the detail and dates of his children, I am looking for original COPY of King James V 1611 with the space /area for family details, could you help me with this, please?

[@HolladayBibleMinistry]

It wasn't Olde English, as in the style of English. it was modern English in the Gothic font. January 1st wasn't new years in the 1611, April 1st was😊 142 years later January 1st became new years.

[@DJaiWins]

If March is the first month wouldn’t that make New Year’s Day March 1st not April 1st

[@HolladayBibleMinistry]

@DanielJaiAllDay something like that. Lol. More a spring time beginning I'd think. Did you do something on the KJV? A video?

[@americanswan]

2:48 Did you see it?

[@treybarnes5549]

I have a Henderson Large Margin Bible. Absolutely love it. It’s a tank. No footnotes. It does have really bad references at the end of verses. Sometimes I follow them and say “What?”. It wouldn’t bother me to take those out I only have one page ripped out of it after 10 years of daily use. Henderson is the best book publishers for ruff and tuff men.

[@betterbiblereading]

Yeah, most of the time the footnote verses in my Bibles are spot on, but there have been times when I'm left scratching my head as well!

[@ateamx3573]

I have it... some places are hard to read due to the print quality the reading plan is real hard to see

[@stephengilbreath840]

I own two copies of the 1611, one with apocrypha, one without. I was gonna switch things up and use the 1611 for my Bible reading this year, but the Roman numerals kept throwing me off, along with the old spelling of words, it was taking longer than normal to read through a book, so I ended up switching to a different Bible.

[@betterbiblereading]

I've used the reading plan in there myself, and I agree that the roman numerals, the font, and the strange spelling abbreviations for some of the books made it VERY tough to do. I usually could figure out what the book was, but the holy day special readings would break from the normal order, making it hard to figure out at times.

[@GodisGracious1031Ministries]

Somtimes reading slowly and trying to figure out the words is a good thing as sometimes if its too common, we often overlook it..

[@RonaldTolar-pg8uh]

the first edition of the 1611 KJV Contained the Apocrapha.

[@jamessheffield4173]

A circumstantial case for the Comma of John: In 484 A.D. the bishop of Carthage with 400 bishops quoted the comma to an Arian Vandal king. Being the bishop of Carthage, he would have had access to the Scriptures of Cyprian, and he probably had a Vulgate, maybe a first edition. Also, Gregory Nazianzus wrote on the grammar, and he had a student named Jerome. Seems strong evidence to me. Blessings.

[@sorenpx]

That's interesting. There is also a very interesting numerical/mathematical argument as well: m.kzbin.info/www/bejne/p6m6qWB5bp6XfKc

[@Tacamojoe2]

Appreciate it as a beautiful Bible and the word of God.

[@ChrisLilly-e9b]

It is good to use the original 1611 King James Bible or also the 1769 Blayney Oxford Edition which we normally use now, but no other Bible, otherwise You get mixed messages, and God is NOT the Author of Confusion. The Bible he has is not a facsimile, but a reprint of the spelling as it was in the original King James, and which the English used into the seventeenth century, although it is not Old English, but early modern, with the inconsistent spelling of the time - not a sleight on the King James, but just a fact about the English of the time, that men often spelled the same word different ways even in the same passage. The language of the King James was from a former time, of up to one hundred years before, the English language as it was long after the time of Geoffrey Chaucer and the Wycliffe Bible.

[@Byzantine_Orthodox_Christian]

The bible existed in oral form for centuries before the Church Fathers decided what was going to go into the bible. KJV is flawed just like any other translations, my advice is to learn Koine Greek and ancient Hebrew or just accept that no English translation is perfect and that they are all just varying degrees of best the translator could do.

[@Eryk178]

Psalms 12:6-7 "The words of the Lord are pure words: as silver tried in a furnace of earth, purified seven times. Thou shalt keep them, O Lord, thou shalt preserve them from this generation for ever." ​@@Byzantine_Orthodox_Christian

[@selaminbelica777]

Thanks for sharing! Is there an Amazon link for that specific version?

[@betterbiblereading]

I don’t see it on Amazon but here’s a link to it nonetheless www.thekjvstore.com/1611-edition-kjv-bible-400th-anniversary-edition-hendrickson/

[@roceesham]

Great review

[@kent7525]

Nice review

[@betterbiblereading]

Thanks so much!

[@nickkizziah9064]

I caught a typo in your presentation of this text. ACTS has 28 chapters, not 26.🤔

[@betterbiblereading]

Sorry for the confusion, can you point out where I said this?

[@nickkizziah9064]

@@betterbiblereading It’s nothing you said. I was pointing at the text in the table of contents. It reads ACTS 26 chapters. That is a typo. ACTS has 28 chapters. 😄

[@richardvoogd705]

The 2020 printing I have has the same typo.

[@colenewaltersmusicandother9330]

Isent Apocrypha not good ?

[@richardvoogd705]

As a Protestant, I didn't know that the Apocrypha existed until I was in my 30s, or had possibly heard of it but forgotten. I sometimes compare it to the bonus features on a DVD or blu-ray disk. It can be interesting reading, but doesn't carry the same weight as the Old Testament or New. Some churches accept it as scripture, others don't.

[@Byzantine_Orthodox_Christian]

The church of the first 1000 years dogmatized theirsuccession going back

[@jmcgregor316]

I agree. The 1611 KJV is beautiful. I do however back it up with the ESV.

[@daleurban2921]

You should check out the geneva bible

[@michaelkibble740]

The tiny print hurts my old eyeballs , I need big print Bible. I'm old at 53 ,I did a lot of reading as a kid.

[@diosojrdetanoy4741]

Apocrypha is the missing link where you'll find out what happened to God's chosen people the Israelites. It is rich in information why christians or protestants don't have full understanding of what happened to the lost sheep of the house of Israel. Because in the apocrypha is where the Greek captivity took place.

[@jessicaabukhamsin5048]

I have the regular king James but I’m buying the 1611 king James next

[@blackswanrevelations]

Thanks for sharing. I’m going to buy one.

[@Bob-gn8ph]

TRUTH IS CHRIST has some great KJV videos ❤

[@betterbiblereading]

Thanks for watching Bob!

[@BenjaminBreedlove-v7z]

You are supposed to be using the 1783, not 1611.

[@Chandler-q1w]

It's written in 1st, 2nd, 3rd person, Just read it!

[@Starssun77]

Toda Raba 🤍🕊️

[@muffinman7932]

It's so beautiful I want one!!!!!

[@betterbiblereading]

I highly recommend the look and elegant feel of it. Definitely an enjoyable reading experience!

[@tonyaevans8381]

Love it!

[@Starssun77]

Hallelujah❕🤍 ❤📖

[@PastorPeewee20]

Love mine too

[@deannascott3475]

It is not ehat the 1611 kjv looked like. That ised a Blackletter typeface. Yours uses a Roman typeface. A roman typeface cane out later in 1613.

[@betterbiblereading]

@@deannascott3475 thanks for watching, see my pinned comment

[@truth.74]

🤗

[@Imsaved777]

The Geneva Bible is much better and accurate as well.

[@allwillberevealed777]

Is it really facsimile if it doesn't have the original font or 30+ genealogy illustrated pages found in the original A1611KJV? Then again, it would expose the KJV as a Masonic book.

[@betterbiblereading]

It’s fair to say, as many have pointed out in the comments already, that this is not a 1:1 facsimile of the original 1611. I should have said something like “spiritual predecessor” or “a paid homage” version to the original. Thanks for watching!

[@DrGero15]

"KJV as a Masonic book"?

[@saintanthonythegreatorthod8872]

Do you really read the 1611 King James Bible? Have you ever seen A1611 King James Bible? Because the odds are you can't even understand it. Odds are you are using a revised king james published in 1759. Look in the cover of your bible look in the front and see if that's not the case and if it's 1759 then you're really not using the 1611 king james.

[@MajesticRidez]

The 1611 was written in both Roman and gothic i was 13 when I read the gothic original fax and no it’s not difficult to read at all you can actually read it online

[@saintanthonythegreatorthod8872]

@@MajesticRidez it is not what is commonly read or sold and purchased by "KJV only" people.

[@MajesticRidez]

@@saintanthonythegreatorthod8872 both were commonly read and sold 3 different authorized publishers at the time

[@saintanthonythegreatorthod8872]

@@MajesticRidez at what time? Not today. It is not common at all in this present day that someone owns a 1611 KJV. The revised 1759 is what is common.

[@MajesticRidez]

@@saintanthonythegreatorthod8872 the 1611 is an exact facsimile

[@jennifervonpickartz2428]

I thank G-d for You

[@kathleenking47]

Theres was no letter J in 1611 they barely got rid of the THORN Combination of the b and p. IT made a "th" sound

[@BenjaminBreedlove-v7z]

The 1611 is not perfect like the 1783.

[@betterbiblereading]

The 1783 is perfect?

[@Mr-pn2eh]

I use the AV1611 on a daily basis. The 1769 is trash. I put my eggs in. One Bible

[@DrGero15]

What's wrong with the 1769?

[@AndrewP-fj8rn]

@@DrGero15 nothing. He probably thinks by using a copy of the 1611 version he's somehow being more spiritual than everyone else. Like people that say "Yeshua" instead of Jesus.

[@DrGero15]

@@AndrewP-fj8rn Maybe, I've never heard anyone attack the 1769 in such a way.

[@Byzantine_Orthodox_Christian]

@@AndrewP-fj8rn To be fair Jesus's actual name in English is Joshua.

[@bigboysmeskii8248]

You "beautiful" biblos are a false copy of the original 1611 Scrip. The reason for saying this is because your copy has not the Name of the Creator in it. They changed it by placing "the Lord" in it. The original 1611 Scrip does not have the word "The Lord" in it but rather YHUH, and it does not mention Jesus but rather Yahusha. Why did they changed it? Because Jesus are the new god of the joined pagan Mashiahiyim (Christendom). The true name of YHUH "son" are YAHUSHA and not Jesus. You sir, and million others worship the son of suez, iesous chrisna.

[@BenjaminBreedlove]

1783 is the correct Bible. You need to put that back on teh shelf.

[@betterbiblereading]

🤔

[@BenjaminBreedlove]

WRONG! You do not even believe in the unbelievable power of God to make certain the people at the end time had his official message tyhat reached the whole world like He Said. KJB!

[@E-pistol]

Douay Rheims knockoff, Catholic feast days.

[@lanmarknetworking3034]

A heretical text