Customer Reviews

Holy Bible : 21st Century King James Version (KJ21)

5 star:		(5)
4 star:		(2)
3 star:		(1)
2 star:		(0)
1 star:		(1)

 

 

I have to say this is my favorite Bible, and I pretty much use it exclusively. Contrary to what Mr. Zeolla writes, I think the update is just enough, to where only the very arcahaic and obsolete words are updated to their modern day synonyms. This feature makes it a joy to read, study, and memorize. I love the print type (very unique feature), and the overall layout. I have the burgundy bonded leather edition and it is extremely well crafted, so I know I will have years of use from this Bible. As the publishers note in their preface, this is not a re-translation but a careful and faithful update. Job well done.

The single column layout is less distracting than the double colmun, traditional layout. The page design is the main reason I chose this Bible. There are minimal, well-abbeviated references. Also, there are three text types for emphasis and chapters summaries are nice. I have read from it daily for the past year. I'm hooked!

If you only read the KJV, but are troubled by the out-of-date vocabulary, this may be for you. This is a very mimimal update compared to NKJV or even the 1967 Scofield. Only the very out-of-date words are replaced, nothing else is changed. In fact, it seems many borderline archaic words were left in. The only bad part is that the typeface strategy is distracting, but some readers, those trying to instruct children or lead classes, might like it.

This is exactly what I have been searching for in a Bible. I first started reading the Good News Bible, then the NIV, then the King James. The King James's power, beauty and rhythm has always had hold over me since I started reading it. Read the Sermon on the Mount for instance in the King James Bible is awesome compared to the NIV. The only thing with the King James version is that every now and then I would err in my reading(not good), or not understand a verse because of obsolete or words that now have a different meaning. This lead me to try the New King James version. I still ended up going back to the King James Version until now. I now have in my hands a great book with the old poetic language flows and it has been updated. 1 Thess for example when the Lord Jesus returns for His saints the word prevent is replaced with the word precede.
The word "conversation" 400 years ago had some different meanings to today. Anyway the die hards will say just get with it and learn these old terms which is good for them but not for me, I have at last, finally, after being a Christian for 16yrs, found a Bible version that I am comfortable with.
My only criticism is and I can find just about anything to be critical of is that I would have preferred the one type face, they have used three for various reasons. The have also written it in single column instead of the usual two. This took a little bit of getting used to but I think I actually prefer it in the single column style.
Anyway anyone who wanted to read the King James bible but put it in the too hard basket, I would recommend giving the 21st Century King James Bible a crack. I am thoroughly satisfied with it and it will continue to be my Bible of choice. So, so, so much better than the New King James version. Happy Reading!

I am very pleased with my purchase. Anyone who thinks they can't understand the Bible needs to read this one. It reads just like a story in a book. I am a KJV of the Bible only and this one is fantastic. I would recommed it to everyone who wants an easier Bible to read but still have all the KJV of the Bible words.

The KJ21 is an updating of the KJV. But IMO, it does not update the KJV enough. For example, consider the following question and statement by Jesus, "Why make ye this ado and weep? The damsel is not dead, but sleepeth" (5:39) This is English; but not the kind of English that I speak. The only time I have ever used the word "ado" is in the Shakespearean phrase, "Much ado about nothin'." And I have heard of "a damsel in distress" but a damsel that sleepeth?

For comparison, the New King James Version (NKJV) renders this passages, "Why make this commotion and weep? The child is not dead, but sleeping."

Moreover, the KJ21 is not consistent in updating words that have changed meaning. And it does not seem to update some of the inaccuracies of the KJV.

For example, Mark 1:34 reads in the KJ21, "And He healed many who were sick with divers diseases, and cast out many devils; and He suffered not the devils to speak, because they knew Him."

Compare the NKJV rendering, "Then He healed many who were sick with various diseases, and cast out many demons; and He did not allow the demons to speak, because they knew Him."

Note the use of the word "suffered" in the KJ21. Today, "suffer" means to experience pain. So the NKJV has "allow" here, which fits the context much better. Note also the word "divers." The only time I have ever used this word is in reference to people who jump headfirst into water. The NKJV's "various" is much more understandable.

Lastly, note the word "devils" in the KJ21. The Greek word is "daimonia" and is better rendered "demons" as it is in the NKJV. The Greek word for "devil" is "diabalos" (Matt 4:1). There are many demons, but only one devil ("diablos" is always singular in Scripture when referring to the devil).

So the KJ21 seems not to have changed the wording of the KJV when it would have been prudent to do so. However, I am pleased that the KJ21 did not change a couple of aspects of the KJV. First off, the KJ21 appears to be based on the Textus Receptus that the KJV is based on. I believe this Greek text is truer to the original manuscripts than the "Critical Text" that other most modern-day translations use.

Also, the KJ21 follows the same "formal equivalence" (word for word) translation principle of the KJV. This principle differs from the "dynamic equivalence" (thought for thought) theory that most other modern-day versions use. I much prefer the "formal equivalence" principle. However, the above two points are also true for the NKJV.

So my impression of the KJ21 is not very good. If you are going to "update" the KJV, then update the KJV. But the KJ21 seems to only go part of the way; it updates some of the language but leaves much, well, "dated."

This conclusion is especially pointed as there are alternatives. In addition to the NKJV, the "Modern King James Version" and "The Literal Translation of the Bible" provide formal equivalence or literal translations of the Textus Receptus, but do so using modern-day English. And my own "Analytical-Literal Translation" provides a literal translation of the Majority Text, which is very similar to the Textus Receptus.

For a detailed discussion of the different translation principles and Greek text-types mentioned above, see my book "Differences Between Bible Versions." My book also reviews the other versions mentioned above, along with many other Bible versions.

I was amazed when I first gotten this translation. This is what the NKJV should have been like.

This edition of the King James bible has been very well thought out, is easier to read and therefore more conducive to bible studies.

Why??? Why did someone go to all this trouble to update KJV? If you love the classic KJV, then buy one. If you want the latest in textual scholarsip, then buy a NRSV. The KJV 21 is the WORST of both worlds: It screws up the beauty of the original KJV, and does not provide any increase in accuracy.