KJV Update Project

Status
Not open for further replies.
Polanus1561

Polanus1561

Puritan Board Junior
www.kjvupdate.com

Imagine the KJV 2024 | The KJV Update Bible Project

We are working on a faithful and definitive update of the King James Version (KJV) of the Holy Bible in 2024 for our generation.
www.kjvupdate.com www.kjvupdate.com

Working on a Minimal Update to the KJV in 2023​


The Holy Scriptures Bible Society is conducting this project to faithfully and definitively update the antiquated language of the King James Version (KJV) of the Holy Bible for our generation. Our goal is to alter as little of the text as possible to bring it up to date. The purpose of the project is to help readers and hearers of the KJV to better and more easily understand the word of God. As it is written, “So likewise ye, except ye utter by the tongue words easy to be understood, how shall it be known what is spoken? for ye shall speak into the air.” (1 Corinthians 14:9) Imagine the KJV 2023; that should paint a good picture of the vision for this work. A modern KJV that keeps the same meaning as the original could be an enormous blessing for millions of people. This project includes retaining the distinction between singular and plural pronouns that is present in the KJV and important for many of its readers. For students of God’s word who primarily use a different translation, this work may prove to be a useful study resource. Other KJV updates have been faulty. With respect to being an adequate modern edition of the KJV, they have significant flaws, such as translating parts with a different meaning, lacking quality, and keeping much archaic language. The New King James Version (NKJV) in fact is not a strict update of the KJV into contemporary English, for it contains new translation from the original languages and significantly differs in meaning from the KJV in many places (e.g. Genesis 49:6, 2 Kings 23:29, Job 17:6, Psalm 139:16, Isaiah 9:3, Matthew 6:13). Other substantial differences in the NKJV include the loss of distinction between singular and plural pronouns, and textual notes regarding variant readings from different source texts. To date, a satisfactory and definitive KJV update has not been found to exist, which is why this project is needed.
Click to expand...
Just saw this online somewhere.
 
There have been lots of attempts... Webster's Revision, UKJV, KJV2000, AKJV, MKJV, KJ21, TMB, etc. I wonder how this one will stand out.
 
The "director" of the project appears to be a man by the name of Joseph Johnsen, with no obvious credentials beyond being a Christian. A Gofundme page set up in May 2021 has so far raised $250 toward a $1.8M goal. It seems unlikely that this particular project is going anywhere.

https://www.gofundme.com/f/help-produce-a-faithful-update-of-the-KJV
 
Could not something like this be done in phases; with everything recorded process by process on the web. For instance, only start with replacing thee's, thou's, and ye's. Then Phase 2 could be something like isolating all of the archaic words contrasted to contemporary dictionaries. Then replace them with contemporary equivalents. If a project like this could get someone like Logan; who is fluent and proficient in programming, it takes much of the strenuous and tedious work out of the project. I kid you not, someone like Logan could probably have a project like this done in no time; now pair him with an English professor or graduate, to better work out the wording equivalents, and it doesn't seem it would take anywhere close to a million dollars, let alone 2.

Logan (or someone of his comparable skills) could have a list of all the ye's, thee's, and thou's, in their context, in a matter of days if not hours. And he could isolate all of the archiac words in the same time. His methodology of "isolate, replace, and update" can make short work of things like this. I have seen him first hand do it with 6,600 documents; let alone a single one of only 1,700 pages. I know much more care should be included with handling the Sacred Text. But I dont think that changes the methodology much.
 
Last edited:
davejonescue said:
Could not something like this be done in phases; with everything recorded process by process on the web. For instance, only start with replacing thee's, thou's, and ye's. Then Phase 2 could be something like isolating all of the archaic words contrasted to contemporary dictionaries. Then replace them with contemporary equivalents. If a project like this could get someone like Logan; who is fluent and proficient in programming, it takes much of the strenuous and tedious work out of the project. I kid you not, someone like Logan could probably have a project like this done in no time; now pair him with an English professor or graduate, to better work out the wording equivalents, and it doesn't seem it would take anywhere close to a million dollars.
Click to expand...
I think this is somewhat similar to what the World English Bible (WEB) did. It used an automated process to update the language in the ASV and then had some manual editing work (though it also changed the underlying text from the TR to the MT).
 
I also think a hard part would be acceptance since it seems the KJV Only crowd, at least as I understand it, associates the KJV as an inspired and preserved text. This would include the archaic language. Most people who would be willing to change would use one of the above listed updates, or the NKJV already.
 
After thinking, I doubt this would turn out to be anything. You would have to publish bibles for this too which is a huge investment.

I stand by my view that only TBS would have the influence and resources to work out such an update if they wanted to
 
I suspect that many of us who prefer the KJV as our primary translation enjoy the fact that it’s no longer being updated, and that’s not to mention the KJVO crowd. Given that, and the existence of the NKJV, really don’t see the market for this.

But then again, that hasn’t stopped other translations of recent.
 
I recently purchased an item called The Simplified KJV from Amazon (but haven't received it yet), as I labor to have my congregation understand what they are reading. They struggle to comprehend even the easier modern versions.
 
Jerusalem Blade said:
I recently purchased an item called The Simplified KJV from Amazon (but haven't received it yet), as I labor to have my congregation understand what they are reading. They struggle to comprehend even the easier modern versions.
Click to expand...
Is there an official version of the Protestant Bible in the native tongue of the people you minister too? If not, there is a software and support group for those on the field translating Bibles. I think it can be found at https://paratext.org/ Dont know much about it, but it seems like an awesome resource for those who wish to attempt it.
 
The vast majority of people using the KJV, use it for reasons that no project can ever address successfully. They use it because it's the KJV and not something else and something that is anything other than the KJV misses the point.

Those who don't use the KJV, have a plethora of other options available.

There might be a group that is absolutely committed to the TR, doesn't like the NKJV, and isn't committed to the KJV. But that targeted audience is at best a tiny sliver, and may even be non-existent.
 
Logan said:
There might be a group that is absolutely committed to the TR, doesn't like the NKJV, and isn't committed to the KJV. But that targeted audience is at best a tiny sliver, and may even be non-existent.
Click to expand...
I think this is too broad, Logan. I’m not speaking for those better informed and placed than me, but I would say that for most of those committed to the TR it’s more accurate to say that the commitment to the KJV is “for now” or “until…”; and as for the NKJV, it’s rare to see non-TR commited folks recognize that there are some issues with the translation which give pause, but don’t make it unusable. It’s just that for most TR people the KJV is entirely usable, including with their children, so they stick with it.
 
Jeri Tanner said:
I think this is too broad, Logan. I’m not speaking for those better informed and placed than me, but I would say that for most of those committed to the TR it’s more accurate to say that the commitment to the KJV is “for now” or “until…”
Click to expand...

You may sincerely believe that's the case, but when it gets down into the details it's pretty clear that whether people consciously realize it or not their internal "requirements" mean that, practically speaking, nothing is good enough to replace the KJV except the KJV. Your own "requirements" that it be done during a time of universal reformation and by the entire (or united) English speaking church, attests to that.

Others have requirements that plural and singular pronouns be preserved, specifically with "thee, thou, ye, you" and not some alternative. Or that there be continuity with the past English-speaking church. Or that the text hasn't changed for at least 200 years. Or that it be in the public domain and not commercialized. etc. etc.

At the end of investigating all these requirements (almost all of them seemingly made post facto to disqualify alternatives), I have to conclude that the only acceptable replacement KJV for people who dearly hold the KJV, is, word-for-word, the KJV! And that's fine, but I think that should just be acknowledged openly rather than giving the illusion that there could be an acceptable alternative.
 
Logan said:
practically speaking, nothing is good enough to replace the KJV except the KJV. Your own "requirements" that it
Click to expand...
I stopped the quote on the word “it” because “it”, in the context of your sentence, refers back to your statement “nothing is good enough to replace the KJV except the KJV,” which is an assertion that is certainly not true of those who knowledgeably hold to the doctrine of a received text.
Logan said:
I have to conclude that the only acceptable replacement KJV for people who dearly hold the KJV, is, word-for-word, the KJV!
Click to expand...
These conclusions are based on some faulty assumptions. Have you ever considered asking men like Rev.’s Jeff Riddle, Todd Ruddell, Rob McCurley, or others to clarify the stance of those who hold to the TR and preach from the KJV? That would be the best way to get a handle on the position of those who aren’t KJVO.
 
Jeri Tanner said:
These conclusions are based on some faulty assumptions. Have you ever considered asking men like Rev.’s Jeff Riddle, Todd Ruddell, Rob McCurley, or others to clarify the stance of those who hold to the TR and preach from the KJV? That would be the best way to get a handle on the position of those who aren’t KJVO.
Click to expand...
From a practical standpoint the gentlemen mentioned really are KJVO as nothing else is accepted as a TR text despite the fact that better translations exist in my opinion (the NKJV). I'm not sure anything Logan said can be refuted from a practical standpoint.
 
Last edited:
It seems this controversy never ends! I'd like to state my view again, as one who has defended the TR editions, and the KJV as the most accurate translation, though not the clearest and simplest to understand. I do continue to look around for alternative translations – be they TR or CT based – to help my flock clearly understand what the Lord is saying in His word. So far the NIV '84 or the NLT (New Living Translation) – among others – often fit that bill. Usually I just give my own modernization of the text, though with extended passages I use some of these aforementioned versions, for coherency.

Nonetheless, it remains that, for me, the KJV is the truest to the TR. I doubt it will ever be replaced before the end of the age. Even so – practically speaking, in serving my congregation – I use whatever version best conveys what the Lord is saying, always keeping in mind the final standard of accuracy, letting the flock know if that is departed from. They get from me an ongoing understanding of text-critical issues, and my view pertaining to such.

I'll let y'all know what I think of The Simplified KJV after I receive it.
 
Jerusalem Blade said:
It seems this controversy never ends! I'd like to state my view again, as one who has defended the TR editions, and the KJV as the most accurate translation, though not the clearest and simplest to understand. I do continue to look around for alternative translations – be they TR or CT based – to help my flock clearly understand what the Lord is saying in His word. So far the NIV '84 or the NLT (New Living Translation) – among others – often fit that bill. Usually I just give my own modernization of the text, though with extended passages I use some of these aforementioned versions, for coherency.

Nonetheless, it remains that, for me, the KJV is the truest to the TR. I doubt it will ever be replaced before the end of the age. Even so – practically speaking, in serving my congregation – I use whatever version best conveys what the Lord is saying, always keeping in mind the final standard of accuracy, letting the flock know if that is departed from. They get from me an ongoing understanding of text-critical issues, and my view pertaining to such.

I'll let y'all know what I think of The Simplified KJV after I receive it.
Click to expand...
For the sake of discussion, lets say tomorrow an update on the KJV comes out. It has only one change. They changed Romans 6:2 to change God Forbid to Certainly not. i think that is an objective improvement in accuracy.

Question, would you then change your preferred translation to this version?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

M
  • Locked
Is the NKJV a faithful update of the KJV?
Replies
23
Views
9K
Bill The Baptist
Bill The Baptist
I
  • Locked
KJV only
2
Replies
55
Views
14K
PointyHaired Calvinist
PointyHaired Calvinist
A
  • Locked
KJV
Replies
18
Views
2K
Dachaser
D
Tyrese
  • Locked
KJV
Replies
16
Views
3K
reaganmarsh
reaganmarsh
PilgrimPastor
  • Locked
KJV?
2
Replies
47
Views
10K
Thomas2007
T
Back
Top