A Critique and Caution About The Site kjvparallelbible.org by Christopher Yetzer

(Reposted with permission)

OVERVIEW

Kjvparallelbible is a website created and run by Mark Ward. The main portion of the site includes the text of the New Testament in two versions. The one on the left (or top if you are on a phone or smaller device) is the King James Version and the other is a hypothetical King James Version if it were translated from the modern Critical Text (Nestle-Aland 28th edition). There are a few other informational parts of the site, but the emphasis is on the comparison of the two texts. It should be noted that while Mark promotes and runs the site, the work of editing the KJV text (as far as I know) was not done by Mark himself and neither has he checked the work thoroughly. In the “about” section of the site a note says, “In 2021–2022, an editor was paid to go through the project looking for errors.” So while Ward didn’t do the work, he is the one promoting the site and responsible for its current state.

ITS PURPOSE

The site itself doesn’t give much information as to its purpose. The information it does give on the homepage is unclear or in some sense inaccurate.

“Among the 5,000+ Greek manuscripts of the New Testament that we still have, there are differences. But unless you read Greek, you cannot know for yourself what these differences are. You have to take someone else’s word for it. Until now.”

The first point of confusion is that the site does not attempt to translate all the variants in Greek manuscripts and neither does it translate any of the variants in the apparatus of the modern Critical Text. Therefore one still would not “know for yourself what these differences are” among the 5,000+ Greek manuscripts. Secondly, you are still taking “someone else’s word for it” by using a site prepared by someone else.

Next the homepage says, “Using the KJV Parallel Bible, English speakers can see for themselves the differences between the two major textual traditions. This site compares: Scrivener’s Textus Receptus, the Greek text underlying the KJV, and… the Critical Text, the Greek text underlying most modern Bible translations.” The site however does not seem to compare Scrivener to the Critical Text, but more the KJV to the ESV. There are places where the KJV does not read like a literal translation of Scrivener’s text and there are places where the ESV does not read like a literal translation of the NA28 Critical Text. When Scrivener assembled his text, he used Greek New Testaments which were printed previous to 1611 and the 1611 first printing of the KJV, but the KJV translators were not bound to just printed editions of the Greek New Testament. Also the modern KJV text has some variants compared to the 1611 printing. For example, at the end of Ephesians the 1611 KJV printing did not have “Amen” and so Scrivener (somewhat against his principles since it is found in all the printed Greek texts) left it out of his edition of the Textus Receptus. However KJVParallelBible keeps “Amen” like the modern form of the KJV and against Scrivener’s Textus Receptus. Another example is the word “knowing” in Matthew 9:4 where again KJVParallelBible follows the KJV against Scrivener. This contradiction can also be seen in the “about” section of the site where it says, “There are also differences between the TR and the CT that do not appear on this site because the King James supplies in italics the very word that, though absent from Scrivener’s TR, is present in the CT.” The writer there acknowledges that the KJV’s English is the basis and not Scrivener’s Greek. As for the comparison to the Critical Text, this too seems not to be entirely accurate. The translators of the ESV did not follow in every place the main text of the NA28. For instance in Mark 6:22 the ESV chose to go against the NA28 text and instead used a variant Greek reading. Mark’s site follows the ESV in the edited KJV column instead of the Critical Text (more on this later). So the site does not show “Scirvener’s Textus Receptus and… The Critical Text…” but instead seemingly attempts to compare the KJV against the ESV (something most English speakers should be able to do without taking someone else’s word for it by using this site).

Beyond just demonstrating differences or similarities between the KJV and the Critical Text, what is the principle motivation for the site? Robert Vaughn theorized “The site exists to show that there is not much difference between the texts behind the KJV and modern translations in order to lead readers to conclude they should change to a modern translation, and to show that there is enough difference between the texts in order to lead readers to conclude they should change to a modern translation.” This seems to agree with Ward’s ministry of being an apostle to the KJVO (https://youtube.com/…/Ugkx-Tc_KjjazCZhEBw_lK3HZCry…).

ERRORS

Besides the confusion in the promotional language of the site, there are clear errors in the text as it is presented. When I first saw the site I thought it might be a resource for quickly comparing modern translations which claim to have been translated from the TR. However, upon examination, I noticed that the text of what should have been Revelation 18 actually was the text of Revelation 19. In another case, Mark 5:13 was flipped; the KJV text was in the place of the Critical Text and vice versa. The same thing happened to Mark 9:33, as well as the whole chapters of Mark 13, Acts 11 and 17. I notified Mark about these errors and they have been corrected although my name doesn’t appear on the “volunteers” section of the site (all the better for the time being).

ERRORS WHICH REMAIN

While the above examples were corrected, Mark 5:42 remains flipped. The KJV reads “And they were astonished with a great astonishment” but the site adds to the KJV text “immediately” before “astonished” apparently from the Critical Text (or the ESV). I don’t know how many other examples like this might exist.

As previously mentioned, Mark 6:22 is not correct. The NA28 text reads “τῆς θυγατρὸς αὐτοῦ Ἡρῳδιάδος” contrary to Scrivener’s “της θυγατρος αυτης της ηρωδιαδος”. The NET translates the critical text as, “his daughter Herodias”, but the ESV does not follow the text in the main body of the NA28 and reads more like the KJV. Luke 23:32 is another text which is not correctly notated, at least if one agrees with the translation given by Wallace’s NET Bible and the footnotes of the same “Two other criminals” (I told Mark about this latter example almost 2 years ago and it has not been changed yet, despite the site claiming, “Any errors will gladly be corrected if they are sent to the administrator, Mark Ward.”). Again the site follows the ESV instead of the NA28. Revelation 1:8 is still wrong even though Nick Sayers pointed it out on FB comments quite a while ago (“the beginning and the ending” should be removed from the Critical Text edition). There are other clear variants which are not properly marked, but it isn’t my job to edit the site.

Contrary to the normal process, in some places what should be the standard KJV text seems to have been changed to read more like a literal translation of Scrivener. In Mark 6:55 the site adds “there” to the end of the KJV text which apparently was taken from Scrivener. It also adds “her” before “hand” in Mark 1:31 like Scrivener. But in the “about” section of the site it says, “The specific edition of the KJV used on this site is the Authorized Version made available by Logos Bible Software.” Possibly those working on the text were not properly informed of the details of the project. As we noted above, the advertising is confusing and probably the creator wanted to kill two birds (the KJV and the TR) with one stone, but didn’t know how to accurately accomplish such a goal nor did he express such objectives to the editor/s.

I do not believe that Mark 16:9-20 and John 7:53-8:11 (as well as Luke 22:43-44 and 23:34) are presented honestly. I understand that the Critical Text has variants even within those passages, but they are in double brackets of which the introduction to the NA28 text says that they are, “early insertions in the textual tradition”. Those entire portions should be red and the variants within it possibly noted in a different color. I understand that it makes things slightly more complicated and messy, but these are important passages which should be honestly and clearly marked.

OVERSENSITIVITY

Another problem with the site is actually opposite of what is pointed out above. In some cases it might be overly sensitive. If one were to use the site literally (that is assuming that every variant is clearly and accurately marked) they would conclude that the NKJV often follows the Critical Text. For example in Hebrews 7:16 the KJV uses the word “carnal” while the site gives a Critical Text translation as “fleshly”. What does the NKJV read at that verse – “fleshly”. The same thing happens in 2 Corinthians 7:10 with “worketh” and “produceth”; John 12:4 “Then” and “But”; John 4:9 “which am”; and many other places. I understand that the differences at times are so minute that it is hard to demonstrate the variant, but sometimes the site is too sensitive for its own good or use.

CONCLUSION

In its current condition I’m not sure what value the site has. It is not accurate enough to show all the differences between the CT and the TR or KJV (forgiving for the moment the indecisive objective of the site). Yet it is too oversensitive to be used to make a quick comparison of translations which claim to have been translated by the TR. In the end I cannot recommend this site for any accurate use. I would suggest that the creator choose a clear objective, pass that on to a qualified editor and then check the text himself before promoting it.