New Podcast Also Called, “What Is Truth?”
I will keep writing here as the Lord sees fit, but I’m preparing to commence a new podcast with the same title as this blog I’ve published since 2005. The greatest challenge, I think for me, is the technology for it. I will start with episodes in which I will sit and talk on biblical subject matter. When I am ready to go, I’ll let you know here the date of the first show. It will start with an explanation of the name of the program, “What Is Truth?” Like here, I’m not expecting it to become large. I’m mainly doing this because I want to connect with people here in this area, but the material will transcend this locality.
Some people also just don’t read or read much anymore. They like to get their material via audio or video and through the verbal or multimedia. The goal is still to get the truth out and then let it spread, grow, and cause whatever outcome. His Word will not return unto Him void.
The President Reads the Bible
I believe that the Bible Museum uses the Simplified King James Version, a translation I didn’t know about until I heard about this project related to the 250th anniversary of the United States. I’ve looked at the Simplified KJV, and if it is what I right now think it is, I don’t know why a King James supporter, one who believes in preservation in the original languages behind the English translation, wouldn’t like it. It really doesn’t change the KJV like the NKJV does. If you can keep it civil, I would wonder why, if you believe like I do on preservation, why you couldn’t be fine with it. Let me know.
KJVer and SKJV
This is maybe a correction to the above, but it seems they are using the KJVer, or the Easy Read KJV. Here is John 3:16 in both editions.
KJVer: “For God so loved the world, that He gave His only begotten Son, that whosoever believes in Him should not perish, but have everlasting life.” ACTS 16:31 | the people of the world; Jesus
SKJV: “For God so loved the world that He gave His only begotten Son, that whoever believes in Him should not perish but have everlasting life.”
Comparison Between KJVer and SKJV
ChatGPT says:
The Simplified KJV (SKJV) and the King James Version Easy Read (KJVER) are not the same, although both are modern updates of the 1611 KJV designed for better readability. According to Barbour Publishing, the SKJV (by Barbour) offers more extensive revisions to syntax and phrasing than the KJVer, includes quotation marks, and utilizes a single-column, paragraph-style layout.
Anyway, here is the video with President Trump participating in reading the Bible. I was happy to see it. Maybe you could be happy too.
Merton College, Oxford, Evensong
My wife and I have attended three evensongs in our lifetime. I’m not putting a full endorsement on them, but I thought you might find interest. Almost every college at Oxford University has chapels and in those college chapels they often have evensongs. My wife and I attended this one — there were very few people who did — and the music is amazing at them. Here is this one in 2022, when visiting England. In this below video of that concert, you can see us at the very beginning of the concert and then super prominently (and we get a big chuckle out of it) at 7.43. You can see what kind of seat you can get at one of these concerts.
Articles to Read
I go to RCP (Real Clear Politics) most days, and I scan the titles to articles and read some. There were some especially helpful ones today, so I’m going to put links to those here as a one stop shop.
Moral Inversion and the Iran War
All the Dream Houses of the Left
EXCLUSIVE: Whistleblower Alleges 2020 CCP Election Influence Ops Targeting Trump Were Suppressed
“Fine People” Hoax Uncovered in SPLC Fraud Scam
I didn’t read every word of these articles, as I usually don’t of almost anything I read, except for the Bible. They can keep you informed with the truth on certain subject matter the mainstream media will not cover.
I believe the Simplified KJV–which I have not looked at extensively–does not retain the distinction between 2nd person singular and plural pronouns. So one can no longer tell, for example, the difference in “Marvel not that I said unto thee, ye must be born again.” Also, it introduces capitalization for pronouns referring (in the translators’ opinion) to Deity, but this is interpretive and not reflected in the Hebrew or Greek text. When some random person is speaking to Christ in the gospels, does he think Christ is God or not? How do we know? What about where the Messiah is being addressed in the Old Testament, but it is the Messiah as representative of His people (the one Seed and the seed that belong to Him)?
I also would be concerns that the SKJV did not go back and look at the Hebrew and Greek text. So when it is “simplifying” the KJV it may be messing up the KJV’s replication of the Greek and Hebrew syntax without even being aware of it. The KJV translators believed that the Hebrew vowels and accents were inspired (correctly; that was the common view in their day), and the KJV Old Testament takes the Hebrew accents and the punctuation and syntax that they indicate into consideration. The SKJV didn’t even look at the Hebrew at all. That is not a good way to improve the KJV.
I also would want to see strong churches thinking that we need to go with the SKJV and the Spirit leading that way, instead of nobody even knowing about the SKJV and everyone still using the KJV.
So those are the concerns I would have, at this point, with the SKJV.
I do like the formal equivalence of the 2nd person singular and plural pronouns, because you know when you’re reading what the Greek word is. That is excellent. That might be enough of a deal breaker as an evaluation. It would be worth checking out the capitalization of the pronouns.
Do you have an example of messing up the syntax of the Greek and Hebrew? That would be serious, but I haven’t gone that far. I guess a lot of people don’t want to improve the KJV, because it can’t be improved. Just the suggestion that you could improve it and, hence, needs look at the original language and change some translations in it, would be a deal breaker on this for them.
So the third paragraph is, “please don’t let people know about the SKJV.” It’s going to be pretty well known after this Bible reading and the Bible museum, so it would seem like staying silent would be worse. That’s my opinion. Like every time I have explained why we wouldn’t change on the KJV, I believe it should be a movement too toward the SKJV by true churches, and I know that’s not what this is. I was happy that the Bible museum did not use the ESV, NIV, etc.
Maybe a one-line objection: “The SKJV is neither the KJV, nor is it a translation.”
I think it’s good we can have this discussion in public, because it looks like we’re examining it then. On this one, if it is a simplified KJV then it admits it isn’t translating, just simplifying it for a modern reader. It is the KJV in that all the translation choices are exactly the same. I can’t say I know that at this juncture, but from what I see, it does the same thing as the Defined KJV, except it puts a more up to date word in the actual text instead of over on the side in the reference column. I don’t see the same way as the NKJV, which in fact is not the KJV because it isn’t the same translation. I know there is a threat here to talk about this at all, but the threat, as I see it, is mainly from English preservationists, who think that the KJV is inspired.
One more thing I’m adding here later as I came back and read this is that I don’t think the SKJV would make it actually, ironically, simpler for me. It doesn’t simplify it. I don’t think people need the present tense to change from doeth to do, for instance. People get, “doeth.” It gives more clarity to the present tense with “doeth,” and verbs such the like.
Well, another thing, would it be wrong, sinful, to use the SKJV, if someone believed in perfect preservation and knew that it was an accurate translation of a perfectly preserved text?
Here is a “run down” of the adjustments made to the commonly accepted KJV edition in this “easy read” edition.
https://biblehub.com/kjver/
So the “Easy Read” is the same as the “simplified”?
ChatGPT says this:
The Simplified KJV (SKJV) updates the 1611 King James Version by removing antiquated language, modernizing punctuation, and breaking up long sentences to improve readability while maintaining the original, often referred to as Authorized Version, translation work. It focuses on updating words, verb forms (e.g., -eth), and pronouns (thee/thou) for modern readers.
Key differences between the Simplified KJV and the standard KJV include:
Language Updates: Archaic terms and pronouns (ye, thee, thou, hath, etc.) are replaced with modern English counterparts, although some classic phrasing is retained.
Punctuation and Structure: Modern punctuation, including quotation marks for spoken words, is introduced. Long, complex sentences are broken up, frequently converting colons and semicolons into periods.
Capitalization: Personal pronouns referring to the Deity are capitalized.
Format: The Simplified KJV often uses paragraph formats instead of the strict verse-by-verse format of the traditional KJV, though verse numbers are retained.
No New Translation: Unlike the New King James Version (NKJV), which was a re-translation, the Simplified KJV retains the original 1611 translation work, focusing only on updating words that hinder modern understanding, as explained in this review.
Dear Bro Brandenburg,
Thanks for the response. I have not examined an SKJV, and I have not even seen it. I suspect it is better than an NKJV.
I suspect that if they are just simplifying syntax without looking at the original language text they are not going to have any idea what the Hebrew accents are indicating about punctuation breaks.
This post explains the Hebrew accents and the KJV punctuation:
https://kentbrandenburg.com/2021/05/21/king-james-version-punctuation/
This conversation is particularly interesting to me because my (and as near as can tell, both Kent and Thomas’) is that an updated translation is theoretically possible, and will eventually (whether in decades or centuries, idk) a necessity; and this conversation brings us to the question: what do we want that to look like? Do we want a re-translation (like the nkjv, but done right) or an update, (like the Simplified KJV, but done right). I admit, my instincts lean toward a modernization/ update, rather than a full re-translation. Again, when that would be helpful and necessary is fully up for debate.
I point out that previous KJV updates were not new translations, and they also did not look ONLY at the English, but still looked at the original languages (unlike the SKJV); hence, for example, some adjustments in the italicized words.
I read that they are using the KJVER, published by Whitaker House, which is different than the SKJV published by Barbour. Anyway, do either of these translations/updates have errors? Who did the translations? I don’t know near enough about these to trust them, unlike the KJV which, although I don’t understand everything I read in it, I believe is accurate and praise God for His Word! I’m open to study helps, if they actually help.
Maybe this is what Jeff Voegtlin was saying, that the KJVer is the version used. I added something to the post for the sake of understanding.