The Nelson KJV with Apocrypha

[@RGrantJones]

A short supplementary video about two surprising typos in the Apocrypha: kzbin.info/www/bejne/sHW6dqeFitl8h9E . For those of you wondering about the inclusion of 3 Maccabees and the differences in 2 Esdras, as of 16 May 2023, the origin of this particular edition of the Apocrypha remains obscure. My point-of-contact at the publisher says that Thomas Nelson has owned the translation for decades, but he hasn't been able yet to discover the details of its origin. He does promise to let me know them if those details ever come to light.

[@glenn1611]

Thanks for the update, sir. That is disappointing on TN’s part. This edition remains a real head-shaker.

[@peterpapoutsis496]

Thank you, Grant. This is very much appreciated

[@darrellisme]

The typographical error found in Wisdom of Solomon 5:14 is very disappointing. It reads: " For the hope of The Godly is like dust that is blown away with the wind;.....".

[@RGrantJones]

@@darrellisme - Thanks for passing that typo along. I wonder how such an error could have been introduced accidentally: Not only was 'un' removed from before godly, but the g in godly was capitalized also.

[@darrellisme]

@RGrantJones I agree, it seems beyond accidental. I came across another typographical error in my morning reading. Checkout Ecclesiasticus 11:17.

[@ma-mo]

Very rarely do I see a review of a brand new bible that tempts me. This one does, a bit. Seems a nice option for the budget-minded, prayer-book using, KJV appreciator. Thank you, once again, for the detailed review.

[@RGrantJones]

Thank you for commenting, Moving About and Manipulating Objects!

[@GirolamoZanchi_is_cool]

Heretical prayer: O Mother of Perpetual Help, thou art the dispenser of all the gifts which God grants to us miserable sinners; and for this end He has made thee so powerful, so rich, and so bountiful, in order that thou mayest help us in our misery. Thou art the advocate of the most wretched and abandoned sinners who have recourse to thee: come to my aid, for I recommend myself to thee. In thy hands I place my eternal salvation, and to thee I entrust my soul. Count me among thy most devoted servants; take me under thy protection, and it is enough for me. For, if thou protect me, I fear nothing; not from my sins, because thou wilt obtain for me the pardon of them; nor from the devils, because thou art more powerful than all hell together; nor even from Jesus, my judge, because by one prayer from thee He will be appeased. But one thing I fear: that in the hour of temptation I may through negligence fail to have recourse to thee and thus perish miserably. Obtain for me, therefore, the pardon of my sins, love for Jesus, final perseverance, and the grace ever to have recourse to thee, O Mother of Perpetual Help. This is a legit Roman Catholic prayer, look up "O Mother of Perpetual Help" if you want to know if it’s legit. This is super heretical. This doctrine of invoking departed saints doesn’t seem just like "hey it’s like praying to a friend.". . .

[@philipwest4553]

One more option not mentioned in the video, is the Cambridge New Paragraph Bible, and perhaps the original Paragraph Bible, though I think it is out of print in any editions that may contain the apocrypha.

[@eclipsesonic]

I love this Bible. I had it for my Birthday very recently and it's a great KJV. Another modern-day KJV publication that contains the Apocrypha (besides this and the Cambridge Cameo) is David Norton's Cambridge Paragraph Bible, with or without the Apocrypha that's both in hardback and calfskin leather, which is a single-column, paragraph-format Bible. Another recent Thomas Nelson KJV Bible I ordered earlier is their new KJV, Paragraph-style Large Print Thinline Bible. I bought the purple leathersoft version and not only does it look lovely in purple, but it's also in paragraph rather than verse-by-verse format, which is something I personally prefer for reading and not many KJV's are published in paragraph format. The translation notes and cross-references are also at the bottom of the page (like a Schuyler Bible) rather than in a centre-column. Tim Wildsmith channel recently did an unboxing for it and the KJV Apocrypha. I thought I would mention it in case you were interested in checking it out.

[@RGrantJones]

Thanks for commenting, eclipsesonic! Tim does excellent work.

[@jabames]

wish they would produce NKJV with deutercanonical books, or a compact OSB

[@VitoUno]

The NKJV gets to much wrong to be trusted. The ONLY bible I've seen some close to being as good as the KJV is the SKJV (simplified) and it has some flaws with a few words they switched out but all are listed in the back to easily correct back.

[@tony.biondi]

Thank you, brother - excellent review, as always - thorough, detailed and helpful.

[@RGrantJones]

Thank you for the kind comment, Tony!

[@albertritchot5393]

I've loved your reviews over the years and this helps me determine which Bible I would like to use.

[@RGrantJones]

Thanks for the kind comment, Albert! I'm glad the videos are useful.

[@hassanmirza2392]

After reading Bible for some years, I think KJV is less important for understanding the Bible, more for appreciating the beauty of English language.

[@RGrantJones]

Thanks for commenting, Hassan!

[@hassanmirza2392]

@@RGrantJones Closest to KJV in all European languages is probably Luther Bible, which is the best piece of German literature, and it standardized German language. I think Synod Bible did the same for old Slavic language.

[@RGrantJones]

@@hassanmirza2392 - I'd like to research the Synodal Bible some day. Unfortunately, I doubt I'll live long enough to do what I'd really like --- to learn the language well enough to appreciate its literary qualities.

[@doomerquiet1909]

I still read it often, i’m and Esv and Lsb guy myself, both for understandability as well as textual basis, but i love the king James language, how it makes you stop, think, and reflect. I’ve annotated through my king James most every place it differs from modern translations, to include the reference Jesus leading the Israelites out of Egypt in Jude.

[@hassanmirza2392]

@@doomerquiet1909 Agreed KJV is the greatest piece of English literature, hands down. And it will remain. Luther Bible is the same for German, but both are translations. Quran is the first book of Arabic and the greatest literary master piece of its language.

[@lego_yoda]

A small correction: there are some references from the canonical books to the apocrypha in the Cambridge Cameo w/ Apocrypha starting with a reference in Genesis 1:26 to Wisdom 2:23, but they are few and far between (although there are over a dozen references to 1 and 2 Maccabees in Daniel 11 and 12).

[@eclipsesonic]

Hebrews 11:35 to 2 Maccabees 6:19,28 is another example.

[@RGrantJones]

Thank you, Legoyoda! I think I was aware at one point that the Cambridge edition had a few such references, but had forgotten that fact by the time I made this video.

[@orthodoxpilgrimofficial]

Now I'm sure I'll buy it soon, thanks for that.

[@RGrantJones]

You're welcome, Orthodox Pilgrim. Thanks for commenting!

[@Mario-wx2so]

Did not expect this review, but I am very glad you did it sir.

[@RGrantJones]

Thanks for commenting, Mario!

[@kainech]

I bought a hard copy of this. I wish I knew the provenance of 3 Maccabees in it as well as the other differences you showed. I knew the KJV didn't have 3 Maccabees, but I didn't have copies of the other Scriptures like 1 Esdras.

[@MelodyM-blue]

I am thinking KJV with Apocrypha/Deuterocanicals would be a great addition to my resource library. Thank you for the review, as this gives me some choices.

[@rachelkarslake7787]

Thank you for the review. I am thinking of purchasing a copy of the KJV, and the hardback copy of this one is on my "short list," due to the inclusion of the Apocrypha. Overall, it looks very nice. I agree that references in the Apocrypha should have been included. Not only are they helpful, but it helps keep the layout consistent throughout the book. Another thing I would suggest to the publisher is to change the size of the verse numbers or place them at a greater distance from the text. Having the verse numbers so close and the same size as the text was visually confusing for me. (I have never been bothered by that before, but I really noticed it in the review.)

[@RGrantJones]

Thanks for commenting, Rachel! Those are good points. Since the publisher sent me this copy for review, I intend let them know how to view the video. Perhaps they'll read the comments as well.

[@GirolamoZanchi_is_cool]

Heretical prayer: O Mother of Perpetual Help, thou art the dispenser of all the gifts which God grants to us miserable sinners; and for this end He has made thee so powerful, so rich, and so bountiful, in order that thou mayest help us in our misery. Thou art the advocate of the most wretched and abandoned sinners who have recourse to thee: come to my aid, for I recommend myself to thee. In thy hands I place my eternal salvation, and to thee I entrust my soul. Count me among thy most devoted servants; take me under thy protection, and it is enough for me. For, if thou protect me, I fear nothing; not from my sins, because thou wilt obtain for me the pardon of them; nor from the devils, because thou art more powerful than all hell together; nor even from Jesus, my judge, because by one prayer from thee He will be appeased. But one thing I fear: that in the hour of temptation I may through negligence fail to have recourse to thee and thus perish miserably. Obtain for me, therefore, the pardon of my sins, love for Jesus, final perseverance, and the grace ever to have recourse to thee, O Mother of Perpetual Help. This is a legit Roman Catholic prayer, look up "O Mother of Perpetual Help" if you want to know if it’s legit. This is super heretical. This doctrine of invoking departed saints doesn’t seem just like "hey it’s like praying to a friend.". .

[@GirolamoZanchi_is_cool]

And you will seek Me and find Me when you search for Me with all your heart. -Jeremiah 29:13 “For God so loved the world, that He gave His only Son, so that everyone who believes in Him will not perish, but have eternal life. -John 3:16 Repent therefore, and turn back, that your sins may be blotted out. -Acts 3:19

[@micahwatz1148]

You should do a review on the new edition thompson nkjv large print . Its great.

[@RGrantJones]

Thanks for the recommendation, micah!

[@g.esquibel2709]

Thanks so much! Could you give me the complete title of that Nestle Greek Bible with the cross-references?

[@RGrantJones]

Yes. It's the Nestle-Aland Novum Testamentum Graece, 28th revised edition. Thanks for commenting!

[@j.woodbury412]

I have the version in two-toned Leathersoft. Except I have the version without the Apocrypha.

[@larrym.johnson9219]

Thanks for this review of this Edition of the KJV apocryphal /deuterocanonical. I purchased this from Christian book distributors, and it was the last copy available in the leather, I have been searching for a while, for a complete KJV, I do have a Cambridge edition hard bound with deuterocanonical and apocryphabut the print is somewhat smaller, I'm happy with the with this Edition I do wish that they had had some references in the deuterocanonical books. I'm pleased to watch your review as always, you always bring a lot of clarity, and expertise brother .👍🔥🤟⛪👨‍👩‍👧‍👦🇺🇸👨‍🦽

[@RGrantJones]

Thanks very much for the encouraging comment, Larrym.!

[@treeckoniusconstantinus]

I wonder where this KJV got its 3 Maccabees translation from.

[@RGrantJones]

Thanks for commenting, Treeckonius! This edition itself doesn't say where the translation of 3 Maccabees came from. I did a number of internet searches using sections of the text, but I had no success. I then asked the publisher, but so far I haven't heard back from them. If they do respond, I'll try to remember to let you know. I may add a pinned comment here and post a note in the channel's "Community" tab with their response.

[@treeckoniusconstantinus]

@@RGrantJones Good to hear, Dr. Jones. I saw the folks over at Catholic Bible Talk have this same question under their review of this edition, and they were also unsuccessful at finding the source text. As you said in the review, it certainly *sounds* like the KJV language, but that's the weird bit; it doesn't seem to be a "reversion" of the NKJV text into the old KJV style. And if Nelson just so happened to own some obscure document where the KJV translators made a translation of 3 Maccabees that never made it into the 1611 Bible itself, that seems like something we'd have heard about within the last few centuries before today.

[@peterpapoutsis496]

@Treeckonius Constantinus I was thinking they took it from the Geneva Bible because the Geneva Bible did have 3 Maccabees. Idk. Hope we get an answer. Take care and God bless.

[@RGrantJones]

@@peterpapoutsis496 - my facsimile copies of the 1560 Geneva Bible include only two books of Maccabees.

[@peterpapoutsis496]

@@RGrantJones then I am at a loss.

[@kree9359]

Thank you for the review!

[@RGrantJones]

You're welcome, kree935. Thanks for commenting!

[@MAMoreno]

This edition kinda drives me crazy. The layout is rather nice for a verse-by-verse reference Bible. It doesn't have that dictionary feel to it that's so common with that format. And the idea of a KJV with Apocrypha from a major publisher is welcome. But there are three things that make it feel like a _fake KJV,_ if you will. First, there's the absence of the translators' preface. If they're restoring the Apocrypha, why not restore the preface as well? Second, the box misleadingly speaks of "translator notes," which would suggest the 1611 version's marginal notes. Instead, it's a set of notes used by Thomas Nelson for some editions of the KJV. Third . . . well, Third is the issue, right? Inserting an additional book into the KJV's Apocrypha feels like revisionist history.

[@RGrantJones]

Thanks for commenting, M.A. Moreno. The addition of 3 Maccabees puzzles me. I've asked Thomas Nelson about that, but they haven't replied yet.

[@gilbertculloden87]

Good review as always, but I'm very curious where this translation of 3 maccabees came from. I believe there were English translations of 3 maccabees as early as the 1500s but as far as I know they were never included in any printing of the KJV

[@RGrantJones]

Thanks for commenting, Gilbert! I'd like to know whose translation that is as well. I asked the publisher, but Nelson hasn't responded yet. I tried searching the internet using short selections from the text, but I wasn't successful. If the publisher responds, I'll try to add it here in another reply.

[@yellowantphil]

That's what I've been wondering about too. All I was able to determine from a different review of this Bible is that its 3 Maccabees text doesn't match what's in the Orthodox Study Bible either. It's strange that they would add a book and make no comment on it.

[@jeanpierrelafargue6943]

Great thorough video! Are you certain that the cameo has thinner pages? It seems that the pages are more rugged. I would love to know.

[@RGrantJones]

Thanks for that kind comment! Yes, according to my measurements, the Cameo with Apocrypha is about 30 microns/sheet, while this edition is 34. But Cambridge has published different editions of the Cameo over the years, some of them with very thick paper.

[@jeanpierrelafargue6943]

Thank you for the update, sadly I then saw the video updates concerning the errors within. I certainly hope it gets corrected. Are you still reviewing the apocrypha for more possible errors? Keep the reviews coming.

[@RGrantJones]

@@jeanpierrelafargue6943 - "Are you still reviewing the apocrypha for more possible errors?" No, I haven't been doing so lately.

[@legacyandlegend]

I was going to pick up a new kjv with apocrypha. Unfortunately it doesn't give you cross references in the apocrypha. I'm not a fan of that. The original 1611 kjv did...

[@RGrantJones]

That's true. If Bible readers could convince Nelson that Bibles with Apocrypha sell well and having references in the Apocrypha is important to a sizeable portion of the market, I think they could manage to provide them. Thanks for commenting!

[@vaspat3]

I was not a fan of them not including the references. I was won over with the 9.5 font in comfort print. The Cambridge Cameo KJV with apocrypha has the references included but not as exhaustive as the other books in the canon.

[@AlphaOmegaTruth7]

The third Macabees is part of the Septuigent and they have Septuigent corrections inserted in the mosaic texts. So maybe this is why they included it because they saw it in the Septuigent

[@zachtrix8428]

Mr. Jones, who is the person in your profile picture? I’ve wondered for quite some time.

[@RGrantJones]

That's John Muir. A few years ago, someone told me that I looked a bit like him (likely because of the long beard). Thanks for the question!

[@zachtrix8428]

@@RGrantJones Fascinating- I hadn’t heard of him until now. Thanks for enlightening me!

[@masonrawls4017]

Mr. Jones, I seem to recall some videos of yours called "the Bible in English", and I seem unable to find them. Have you removed them?

[@RGrantJones]

Thanks for commenting, Mason! No, they're still there, though I haven't added any new material recently. They're located at my other channel: kzbin.info/door/Jhb7-L8oXzwra-JFB4_dDw .

[@Arkangilos]

What’s the purpose of art gilding verses regular gilding?

[@RGrantJones]

I think it's a bit more attractive. It takes more effort to produce (two steps instead of one), which may be the reason it's associated with premium Bibles. Thanks for commenting!

[@proverbs9103]

Very good review i bought this but without the apocrypha

[@peterpapoutsis496]

Wait! 3 Maccabbes is in the KJV with Apocrypha??? Wha...? Soooo...is Ps. 151 also in there??? Is this like a traditional Orthodox Bible??? Very confused but interested.

[@RGrantJones]

Thanks for commenting, Peter! I speculate that, at some point in its long history, Thomas Nelson published an expanded edition of the KJV that included someone's translation of 3 Maccabees along with the usual KJV Apocrypha. In that old expanded edition, there was likely an introduction that told who the translator of 3 Maccabees was, and why Nelson chose to include it. Then someone in the modern Thomas Nelson, who was tasked with job of producing a KJV with the Apocrypha, used that old expanded edition as a guide, and neglected to add in the explanatory material. But all that's guesswork on my part.

[@peterpapoutsis496]

@@RGrantJones I wonder if any of the King James translators left any notes on this?

[@RGrantJones]

@@peterpapoutsis496 - I wish I knew the answer. I was just skimming through Scrivener's _The Authorized Editions of the English Bible (1611)_ and found no mention of 3 Maccabees. The index has entries on the Apocrypha, and points to pages that identify Coverdale as the first translator of those works into English; that state that the KJV translation in the Apocrypha is closer to the Bishop Bible than in other books; that mention the deletion of cross references to Apocryphal books in later editions; and that state that translation work for the Apocrypha was consigned to the second Cambridge company. Not much help there. I can't help wondering whether the differences in 2 Esdras apparent in this edition are related to the curious presence of 3 Maccabees. I should probably do a more careful check of the other Apocryphal books in this edition to see if they, too, have been updated.

[@peterpapoutsis496]

@R. Grant Jones good evening, Grant. Are there any updates on the 3 Maccabees issue in the KJV?

[@RGrantJones]

@@peterpapoutsis496 - I had another email from the publisher on Wednesday, which told me that they could possibly send a response by today (Friday, 21 Apr 2023).

[@RobertP_1960]

I love all your reviews, I don't always comment. I do have one question..can you do a video on how to read the manufacturing date of a bible..they use different numbering systems. You did show on this one 1st printing 2023.. using those numbers at the bottom of page.

[@RGrantJones]

Thanks for commenting, Robert! Not all publishers use the same method, so sometimes it's hard to be sure. But for a Nelson Bible printed recently, it's straightforward. In the string of numbers at the bottom of the copyright page, the print run is the last number visible to the right. The year of printing is the first number visible on the left. For the second print run, the "1" at the far right will be erased, so that the last number on the right is a "2". If that printing occurs in, say, 2025, the first number that appears on the left will be "25". I may do a short video on this topic. Thanks for the suggestion!

[@RobertP_1960]

@@RGrantJones thank you so much for your response. Your video are, I believe the most helpful on KZbin. take care

[@user-hu8tw2ot3t]

i picked up the cambridge KJV Cameo with apocrypha then this came out haha. but i think im glad i went with the camo

[@RGrantJones]

Thanks for commenting, c! Yes, the Cameo definitely has advantages, such as references in the Apocrypha and a higher quality cover. Nelson's edition is less expensive (much less expensive if you choose one of the imitation leather or hardback editions) and has a larger font.

[@RGrantJones]

And the red is better in the Cameo also.

[@user-hu8tw2ot3t]

@@RGrantJones thanks for the videos grant. God bless you and yours

[@fnjesusfreak]

I have the hardback version of this - it also has the double overcasting. Surprised to see overcast stitching in front AND back in a 2023 edition. And publishers really need to do away with red letters.

[@whatifonepiece]

I'm sorry to ask this question on a different video and I got both of these bibles confused. I was does this version contain Psalm 151?

[@RGrantJones]

No, Psalm 151 is absent. Thanks for the question!

[@glenn1611]

Just catching up with this excellent and useful review (as always). This a rare misfire for TN. I can’t wait to hear their explanation about the differences in 2 Esdras and where this version of 3 Maccabees came from and why it’s included. It will be interesting if they have anything additional to say about why they didn’t simply publish a “traditional” KJV with Apocrypha. If their rationale was to expand it why did they add 3 Maccabees but not 4 Maccabees and Psalm 151? I’d like a KJV with Apocrypha in ComfortPrint on my bookshelf, but this weird mongrel of an edition ain’t gonna be it.

[@whatifonepiece]

To be fair, 4 Maccabees isn't considered canon to the Eastern Orthodox church, but 151 Pslam, I have no idea.

[@monvici]

I have a question about this book. Does the English language is and old style or modern style? How many pages there is?

[@wisconsinwoodsman1987]

Oh, man...I just got the Ryrie. I told God I would stop sneaking bibles into the house pass the wife's watchful eye.

[@RGrantJones]

Any chance she'll allow this one in the house?

[@wisconsinwoodsman1987]

@@RGrantJones Well, I did just get her the Abide study Bible in NKJV. I better wait a few weeks😂 Thank you for all the hard work you put into your videos. Definitely a pleasure to watch and learn.

[@RGrantJones]

@@wisconsinwoodsman1987 - thank you!

[@AJ-je3pl]

Dose this Bible have the book of Enoch in it I couldn’t see it when I paused the video

[@RGrantJones]

No, it isn't included. Thanks for the question.

[@Proclivitytolife]

In the comparison you have around the 20mins mark, what is/are "ecumenical bibles"? I know what ecumenism means and what bible means, but I haven't heard the two put together. What are examples of such "ecumenical bibles"?

[@RGrantJones]

Thanks for the question, Proclivitytolife. I use the term 'Ecumenical Bibles' to describe the editions that include all the books listed on that chart. Examples are the RSV and NRSV New Oxford Annotated Bibles and the Cambridge ESV Diadem with Apocrypha.

[@Proclivitytolife]

@@RGrantJones oh okay, thanks, I see.

[@jesurunblends]

How does Ecclesiasticus 17:16 read? Does it say godly or ungodly?

[@RGrantJones]

It reads, "Every man from his youth is given to evil; neither could they make to themselves fleshy hearts for stony."

[@jesurunblends]

Ecclesiasticus in the Apocrypha

[@RGrantJones]

@@jesurunblends - that's what I quoted. Are you sure you have the right chapter and verse?

[@jesurunblends]

@RGrantJones you are right, sorry, I meant Ecclesiasticus 11:17

[@RGrantJones]

@@jesurunblends - kzbin.info/www/bejne/sHW6dqeFitl8h9E&lc=Ugwuc1YR3ohsUvzOw6N4AaABAg.A4iiC-ND6dvA4nVxG_H0_d

[@DutchMcGinnis]

That is a very pleasing to read bible. I would like to see a bible that uses blue instead of red for the words of Jesus.

[@RGrantJones]

The font is easy on the eyes. Thanks for commenting, Confederate Berean!

[@gilbertculloden87]

You may be aware but the Humble Lamb bibles have words of Christ in blue

[@RGrantJones]

Thomas Nelson also sometimes prints Bibles with the words of Christ in blue. www.christianbook.com/nkjv-thinline-reference-comfort-maclaren-leather/9780785297932/pd/297934

[@ZBajie1]

How much?

[@RGrantJones]

As of 16 April 2023, the genuine leather edition is selling for $93 at Christian Book Distributors. Imitation leather is $46.49. There are also thumb indexed editions, which cost about $9 more.

[@ponketon]

This bible has the 3rd book of the Maccabeus. The KJV1611 doesn't. Is it a true KJV bible?

[@j.woodbury412]

I enjoy your videos, but I'm curious why you never show your face. Is it because you'd rather the focus be on the product and not on you? I can respect that. It's just that I try to imagine what you look like from your voice. It's very distinctive.

[@RGrantJones]

Thanks for the question. Yes, I've arranged the lighting and camera with the goal of showing the Bibles I'm reviewing in detail. I may start showing my face at some point, but I'm not set up to do so. I look something like the black-and-white image of John Muir alongside my name, but my beard is a bit longer, my hair somewhat shorter, and I wear trifocals.

[@j.woodbury412]

@@RGrantJonesOh okay. Thanks for replying. I was wondering if that was you in your picture.

[@stephengilbreath840]

I love the KJV, the Apocrypha not so much lol

[@RGrantJones]

Thanks for commenting, Stephen! For me, the Apocrypha is worth reading, but not inspired Scripture.

[@eclipsesonic]

I concur with what R Grant Jones said. As a Protestant, I agree with you that it's not inspired scripture, but I did read them for the first time last year and they are interesting books that do have good wisdom, interesting storylines and great history (particularly in 1 Maccabees), so I personally do recommend them for their value and insight. In fact, I would even argue that you wouldn't fully understand some passages in the canonical books, unless you read 1 and 2 Maccabees (Daniel 8:9-27, Daniel 11:21-35, John 10:22 and Hebrews 11:35b are the passages I have in mind).