Відео

You are most welcome! I appreciate you.

Are you referring to the book that does not shy away from addressing injustices and truthfully portrays the human condition? The one that reveals our fallen state and the reason we need a Savior? The one that depicts triumph over evil and the vindication of an oppressed people? The one that shows how God had not forgotten those who were enslaved and delivered them? If that’s the book you’re referring to, then yes, I endorse it wholeheartedly. Regarding your personal attack on my dignity and self-respect, my belief in the Bible is rooted in its message of hope, redemption, and justice. It acknowledges human flaws and injustices while also providing a path to righteousness and demonstrating God's enduring love and deliverance. My dignity and self-respect are strengthened by this understanding and the transformative power of its teachings.

​@@gclmedia So do you find the babel passages that endorse slayvery inspiring? Really? let me ask you one last question my friend: Is slayvery immoral or do you support it? thank you for your time.

Thank you for watching and engaging! You are so right. Although it depends on whether or not those memebers use the Bibles published by the Church or not. If so, Concordia publishes with the Apocrypha.

Thank you for your kindness! I think “take to heart” is fitting. The meaning is not far off at all! 🤗

Elaborate...

@@gclmedia in the Book, who was the first created?

Thank you for watching and engaging! Have you had the opportunity to read Daemonologie?

Thank you for watching and engaging. The reason makes a lot of sense. Check out this video 👉🏾 The Truth Behind the King James Bible: History & Facts ua-cam.com/video/5huF3cRCyuE/v-deo.html

Thank you for watching and engaging!

Thank you for sharing! I appreciate you. And I can see how all the “versions” can be confusing. Check out this video and let me know if it helps. If not, let me know what questions or concerns you have and I will be more than happy to do a video on it. ua-cam.com/video/Tt-vhXPzEZY/v-deo.htmlsi=p5AzaY5IPa4Podd6

​@@gclmedia Does that really answer my question though? I asked why would god be okay with his word being altered and mistranslated and misinterpreted?I didn't really get a direct answer. A god that doesn't talk or reveal themselves is indistinguishable from a god that doesn''t exist. As a black man, I find it really weird that you worship any god that sat there for hundreds of years as your ancestors were raped, whipped, lynched, forced into slave ships in cramped conditions sitting in their own feces for weeks, pregnant women being thrown overboard for being too much hassle, feed cut off, do I need to go on? I think anyone who had the ability to stop that would have done it, but not god and that's sad. And not just that slavery, pretty much all races have been enslaved at some point, heck slavery still takes part in some parts of the world today such as eastern italy, but where is the person that foresaw this in their perfect plan thousands of years ago? Missing. If a god does exist, then it is a deadbeat father and not worthy of worship.

Does that really answer my question though? I asked why would god be okay with his word being altered and mistranslated and misinterpreted?I didn't really get a direct answer. A god that doesn't talk or reveal themselves is indistinguishable from a god that doesn''t exist. As a black man, I find it really weird that you worship any god that sat there for hundreds of years as your ancestors were raped, whipped, lynched, forced into slave ships in cramped conditions sitting in their own feces for weeks, pregnant women being thrown overboard for being too much hassle, feet cut off, do I need to go on? I think anyone who had the ability to stop that would have done it, but not god and that's sad. And not just that slavery, pretty much all races have been enslaved at some point, heck slavery still takes part in some parts of the world today such as eastern italy, but where is the person that foresaw this in their perfect plan thousands of years ago? Missing. If a god does exist, then it is a deadbeat father and not worthy of worship.

@shaqyardie8105 the video answers your question as to the intent of the different versions of the Bible.

@@gclmedia I wasn't satisfied with that answer. You say it comes down to preference, which goes back to my question of misinterpretation. Also, you completely ignored all my points in my previous comment. The truth is hard to accept I know, but your god along with the other 3000+ gods in religion are conveniently invisible and need humans to speak on their behalf. Again, a god that doesn't talk or reveal themselves is indistinguishable from a god that doesn't exist. Hopefully you can respond directly to at least one of my points.....

Thank you for watching and engaging. I appreciate you and I completely agree with you about the Apocryphal books. However the reformers did not remove them.

@@gclmedia good morning! I would invite you to look into Early Catholic Church council like the Council or Rome where the cannon of Scripture was decided. They settled of 73 book which where re-examined throughout future church councils and we’re all reaffirmed Compare that to the reformers when they settled on their Bible (King James) and you will see when these books were removed. Apocryphal as they call it means “Hidden”, but their nothing hidden about these books since they were always in the Bible since it was first composed.

Thank you for watching and engaging. It’s important for me to respond to your comment to ensure clarity. The Greek word translated as “young man” in Mark 14:51-52 is νεανίσκος (neaniskos), which typically describes a male in his youth, usually under forty. If the text were referring to a “little boy,” such as Jesus at 12 years old, the term used would be παῖς (pais). This term, found in Luke 2:44, is closely related to παιδίον (paidion) and can mean “child” or “boy.” It would be misleading to claim that the Septuagint states “Little Boy” in this context, as it uses the term νεανίσκος (neaniskos).

@@gclmedia I am not a Greek scholar but I am quoting a professor of Classical Greek Studies. What exactly are your credentials? Also Rabbi Singer said that the translation was purposeful altered in the Old Testament where it says that a “ virgin” would give birth but the Torah says “young woman” not virgin.

Blessings and thank you once again. I am a Seminarian with degrees in Theology and Biblical Studies (among others in Engineering and Business). I am a lifelong student, always eager to learn. Interestingly, I have addressed the Almah and Bethulah argument in my book “Elucidations.”

@@gclmedia So you are not a greek scholar. Also 'degrees' from a seminary mean little. WHERE did you get them and in what field is your PhD? You never really answered his question. I am not disageeing with you that 'young man' is the definition but it was probably not historical and inserted in by whoever wrote gMark as Adela Yarbro Collins writes in her massive 930 pages in her Hermeneia commentary on Mark.

@Gmac6503 Thank you for engaging. I believe @SPQR748 was satisfied with my answer. I am not a university professor specializing in classical Greek, but I have studied Biblical Greek for almost two decades. Although I don't parade my credentials, if you've watched any of my videos, you know I never mention them because they mean nothing. It's the time I've spent studying the word of God that really matters. For context, I studied Theology at Mary Baldwin, Biblical Studies at Liberty University, and Rawlings School of Divinity, and I am currently pursuing my PhD in Biblical Studies at CIU. Adela Yarbro Collins is a prominent scholar in New Testament studies, not specifically in Greek. However, like in my work, she too has done extensive research in Koine Greek, which is essential for the research and interpretation of New Testament texts.

My only desire and hope is to provide as much value to you as possible, in the hope that it will inspire a spark in those who watch my content to open God’s word and read it.

Thank you. The information you gain by watching this channel will surely start some interesting conversations around the dinner table. But always remember that your study is to show yourself approved unto God, as a workmen that has no need to be ashamed and is able to rightly divide the word of truth.

Thank you for watching and engaging. However, your comment is not true. There was nor is there a Latin "Bi’Ba’al"; this is disingenuous at best. The word "Bible" in Latin is "Biblia," which is derived from the Greek word "βιβλία" (biblía), meaning "books" or "scrolls." As Christianity spread throughout the Roman Empire, the Greek "βιβλία" (biblía) was adopted into Latin and then entered Old English as "bībel" or "bīble," exclusively referring to the sacred Christian scriptures. The transition from "Biblia" to "Bible" demonstrates the nuanced linguistic evolution and the influence of Latin on the development of English. If you have the opportunity please watch The Bible 👉🏾 ua-cam.com/video/XraOy5BbA6g/v-deo.htmlsi=JhUeHuxWAzCUISr6

​@@gclmediawhat Bible college did you go to?? Your definitely a man of the cloth, or, rather, of the book😂😂

Blessings and thank you for your kindness. Believe it or not, I went to Divinity School to dignify the call on my life. My desire for study and biblical accuracy began long before I attended a Theology 101 class. I see my passion and ability to understand the Scriptures as gifts from the Holy Spirit, specifically the gifts of wisdom and knowledge.

@@gclmedia I used. Bi-Ba’al because in ancient HEBREW - (CANAANITE) language BAAL 👿👺)translates into English as Lord👀 Also BIBLOS was a CANAANITE SETTLEMENT- the exodus story was the CANAANITES being expelled from AVARIS (Nile Delta) by Pharaoh AHMOSE I for excessive USURY - The word CANAA = Merchant Banker 👀

Thank you for watching and engaging! It’s interesting to delve into the connections between ancient texts and the Bible. While it’s true that many ancient civilizations, including the Sumerians, have texts that predate the Bible, it’s important to clarify a few points. The Bible was NOT translated from Sumerian cuneiform tablets. Ancient texts like the Enuma Elish, the Epic of Gilgamesh, and others certainly provide fascinating parallels and cultural context to biblical stories, suggest that the biblical authors were aware of these storieS we see one such example explicitly in the encounter between Solomon and the Queen of Sheba. Contrary to your belief, the Bible is a very distinct set of texts with its own theological messages and purposes.

@gclmedia Stone predates paper by millions of years. The Vatican translated the bible from these ancient cuneiform tablets. The 1st Council of Nicea Rome created Christianity in 325 A.D., then spread Christianity around the world through bloodshed from 1492

​@@gclmedia Thank you for clarifying what I believe as well!...... They say Satan is always trying to replicate what God has and does. I'm curious though ( and I ask as a well meaning Christian, NOT a heretic) ....how does it 'seem' as if the enemy has gotten ahead, sorta speak, of the Bible with similar events??? 🤔🤔.... If it's one thing about the Bible I like...is that there ALWAYS an answer, this book is PROFOUND! GOD bless you Brother

Thank you for watching and engaging. I’m not sure that I completely understand your comment. Can you please revise it and also advise as to what I am to compare and contrast it to?

@@gclmedia I am sorry I meant to say blind man

@demarkusbunch4159 let me know if I am missing something. Here is a comparison of the Gevena vs KJV: Geneva Bible (John 9:1-7): 1. And as Iesus passed by, he saw a man which was blinde from his birth. 2. And his disciples asked him, saying, Master, who did sinne, this man, or his parents, that he was borne blinde? 3. Iesus answered, Neither hath this man sinned, nor his parents: but that the works of God should be shewed on him. 4. I must worke the workes of him that sent me, while it is day: the night commeth when no man can worke. 5. As long as I am in the world, I am the light of the world. 6. Assoone as he had thus spoken, he spat on the ground, and made clay of the spettle, and anointed the eyes of the blinde with the clay, 7. And sayd unto him, Go wash in the poole of Siloam, (which by interpretation signifieth Sent.) Hee went his way therefore, and washed, and came seeing. King James Version (John 9:1-7): 1. And as Jesus passed by, he saw a man which was blind from his birth. 2. And his disciples asked him, saying, Master, who did sin, this man, or his parents, that he was born blind? 3. Jesus answered, Neither hath this man sinned, nor his parents: but that the works of God should be made manifest in him. 4. I must work the works of him that sent me, while it is day: the night cometh, when no man can work. 5. As long as I am in the world, I am the light of the world. 6. When he had thus spoken, he spat on the ground, and made clay of the spittle, and he anointed the eyes of the blind man with the clay, 7. And said unto him, Go, wash in the pool of Siloam, (which is by interpretation, Sent.) He went his way therefore, and washed, and came seeing. The narrative is essentially the same, with only minor differences in word choice and phrasing. I don’t see that there is any elongation or additional content in the Geneva Bible compared to the KJV in this passage.

Blessings and thank you for watching and responding. Great comment. May I add just a little more nuance? Jesus accepted Thomas’ worship expressing “My Lord and my God,” because Thomas could only come to that conclusion by the revelation of the Holy Spirit. Paul helps us understand this when he states, “Wherefore I give you to understand, that no man speaking by the Spirit of God calleth Jesus accursed: and that no man can say that Jesus is the Lord, but by the Holy Ghost.” (1 Corinthians 12:3, KJV)

@@gclmedia thank you for sharing more!

You are most welcome my Friend! Thats what I am here for! I’m not here to hurt anyone just help…

Thank you! I appreciate you

All smiles here! Thats exactly what I wish everyone would do!

Blessings and thank you for watching! When you have an opportunity please watch the full video. The Geneva Bible VS the King James Bible | Ephesians 6:12 ua-cam.com/video/92tVCHrdhGo/v-deo.html

Blessings and thank you for watching and engaging. It's actually a little more nuanced than that. There is "I am" as in Ehyeh (I am), there is "I am" Ani Hu (I am He), and "I am" Anoki (me alone). So each time we see "I am" in English it can be referring to any one of these in Hebrew. Which would require diligence on our part to discover the given aspect in which it was written or expressed.

I AM is not a name anyway. Jesus NEVER claims to be YHWH! That was a later development centuries after Jesus died.

@@gmac6503 Actually, "I AM" is indeed a name. In Exodus 3:14, God reveals Himself to Moses as "I AM WHO I AM" and instructs Moses to tell the Israelites, "I AM has sent me to you." In the New Testament Jesus makes several "I AM" statements in the Gospel of John (e.g., John 8:58, "Before Abraham was, I am"), which are understood as references to the divine name in Exodus. In John 10:30, Jesus says, "I and the Father are one," indicating His divine identity. The early Christians and New Testament authors clearly believed in Jesus' divinity (e.g., Philippians 2:6-11, Hebrews 1:3). The Council of Nicaea in 325 AD "AFFIRMED," rather than invented, the belief in Jesus' divinity, which had been a foundational aspect of Christian faith from the beginning. Thus, your claim that Jesus never asserted His divinity and that this was a later development does not align with the historical and scriptural evidence.

@@gclmedia I know what the gospel of John says and you totally misunderstand Exodus 3:14. Jesus never claimed to be Yahweh and everything you wrote is just a stew you mixed up so you could make it fit your theology. I am who I am is not a name. You can go to the highest mountain and scream yes it is yes it is but it is not a name all it means is I am who I said I am so you can tell Pharaoh I said what I said and in doing that it was a rebuke. There are and were are many gods in the Bible. Moses was a God to his enemies. those who spoke for God were his ambassadors and were called gods. Jesus achieved divine status in the same way but you never claims to be Yahweh. You didn't even address that. You completely ignored that part of what I wrote and I wrote that part intentionally and you didn't deal with it. If you would buy a good commentary on Exodus it would be explained to you. Good luck. Plus you didn't answer anything I asked anyway. So I'm not gonna waste anymore time even attempting to have a conversation with you.

@@HammondB34Me that's what this guy says and claims but it's nonsense. Maybe you can have a conversation with him but I'm not wasting anymore of my time because he doesn't deal with anything and he just repeats himself. He's an apologist who just doesn't read the scholarship and doesn't read good commentaries and he already has his theology and he's gonna stick to it and it's a simple as that. People like him are a waste of time.

It isn’t! For starts that is not even what Blasphemy means. Then what is His real name? If so, who gave Him that name? 🤷🏿‍♂️ That’s why it is so critical to understand what names actually are and their unique meaning. I wrote about this exhaustively in “The Name Above All Names”

@@gclmedia that's precisely what I'm saying. They may not be his real name, but they embody him and his qualities. How can that be blasphemy?

@MDF4den you are right! People just make things up just to make them up!!! God is called by many names throughout the Scriptures many of which people gave to Him!

I started writing “The Name Above All Names” in 2017. It’s 2024!!!

Love you!!! 😍

@@gclmedia I love you more 😘

Check out this YT Short I made to answer that exact question: ua-cam.com/video/o-JyExR1fxQ/v-deo.htmlsi=dgWm6f1UbLxq3p3D

I appreciate you so much. What about this video resonated with you most? Was there anything that you didn't already know?

​@@gclmedia The scriptures in Isaiah. Jesus was telling us who he was in old testament ❤

@neanam indeed! You caught that!?!? He is the speaker…the LORD God and His Spirit sent me!!!

He told us that that's great His love for us is... He has given us so much evidence of His love.

Thank you so much for watching and engaging.

Blessings to you too! I appreciate you so much!!

Might I ask what document you are insinuating is not from 1611?

Thank you for your comment. I appreciate the opportunity to clarify some important points regarding the history and origins of the King James Bible (KJV). Contrary to your claim, the KJV was not based on the Douay-Rheims Bible. The Douay-Rheims Bible an English translation of the Latin Vulgate made by Catholic scholars. Instead, the KJV was translated directly from the original Hebrew, Aramaic, and Greek texts with the base of the Bishop's Bible by wåy of the Tyndale. Specifically, the translators of the KJV primarily used the Masoretic Text for the Old Testament and the Textus Receptus for the New Testament, ensuring they worked from the original languages rather than Latin texts. St. Jerome directly translated the Vulgate, St. Jerome's translation of the Bible into Latin, into the Douay-Rheims Bible in 1609. However, this Catholic translation is distinct from the King James Bible and is not its source. A large and diverse committee of scholars produced the KJV, cross-checking and reviewing each other's work to ensure accuracy and faithfulness to the original texts. This rigorous process helped to establish its lasting reputation. Despite being contemporaneous, the Douay-Rheims Bible and the King James Bible translated from different source texts, representing distinct traditions within the Christian faith. The KJV's reliance on Hebrew and Greek manuscripts differentiates it from the Douay-Rheims, which was a translation from St. Jerome’s Latin Vulgate. It was a significant work in its own right and became the standard Bible of the Western Christian Church for many centuries. However, the KJV translators aimed to return to the earliest available texts in their original languages rather than relying on the Latin Vulgate. I hope this helps clarify the origins and sources of the King James Bible. Thank you for engaging in this discussion.

@@gclmedia Dear Sir, I have been through these arguments, apologetics and reasonings for more than 40 years. I have the whole history of the King James Version in my possession. I translate directly from the Hebrew OT and the Greek NT. NO ENGLISH VERSION OF THE BIBLE IS CORRECT NEITHER AUTHENTIC...HUGE DIFFERENCES!🛐🕎📜📖🐑✅️

@@gclmedia You are mistaking. The inside page of the King James Bible makes that claim but it is not the truth...Genesis, Exodus, Leviticus etc etc (Old Testament) are Greek names from the Septuagint translation and not from the Hebrew Bible...Get hold of the Hebrew Bible and see the different Hebrew names of the Old Testament books similarly, the same case with the New Teastament books of the Greek New Testament. The Hebrew Bible Tanakh had only 24 books (nothing removed except some of the Old Testament books were not divided into 1& 2 Samuel, 1&2 Kings, 1&2 Chronicles, Ezra/Nehemiah etc etc. If you truly don't believe that the entire King James was translated from the Latin Vulgate and subsequently from the 1609 Douay Rheims bible then I fear for you! Gail Riplinger makes the same absurd claims but she fell off the wagon long ago. The history of the King James Bible is well documented...are you aware the King James Version translation was interrupted for quite a few years because of political unrest in England...

@@gclmedia The King James Bible translators did not use the Masoretic test of the Bible. If that were the case what is "Lucifer" (a Latin word in Isaiah 14: 12 ) doing in the KJV and yet the same word is found in 2 Peter 1: 19 (check the Latin Vulgate...). I hope you can read Latin...that would be the acid test for your erroneous claims. Do you read Old Testament Hebrew and New Testament Greek without the interlinear English below the Hebrew and Greek...wow, Americans can lie without blinking an eyelid. You guys can make us in Africa belief Superman can fly, Batman with a Bat mobile, the Hulk is Green and Captain America has a nice round shield with the American flag on it, Santa Claus from the North Pole with his reindeers bringing gifts down the chimney, Donald duck, mickey mouse, with your many many denominations all using the KJV totally divided on Doctrine etc etc...(Ironically, it was not the kjv that was taken to America by the puritans but the Geneva Bible...). Now suddenly, America wants everybody to belief that the kjv is the true original English version which had the Apocryphal books until the late 1880's which you guys removed back then...how delusional can you get still? Wow...you can truly lie to the world about everything. Come now sir, is there any truth left in America! Africa reels under your American pagan lies and deception. Our children in Africa have lost their identity thanks to America. Enough now....I used to be a member of the IBS (International Bible Society translation committee), and a former Bishop of the Anglican church (Episopalian Church in America) excommunicated because I refused to accept their erroneous doctrines any longer and their LGBTQAI+ movement coming from your country...wow, in the land of the blind the one eyed is king! We are not ignorant in Africa no sir, just sick and tired of the continual lies and deception....I share this with you dear sir, no bitterness from my side just enough is enough don't you think?

@@---zc4qt There's no such thing as "tHe gReEk" All those verses you posted are corrupt perversions.

Blessing and thank you for watching and engaging. Your thoughts are intriguing but might I add some key facts? Before the King James Version (KJV) of the Bible was printed in 1611, other notable Bibles were printed long before including the FIRST BIBLE PRINTED the Gutenberg Bible in 1455, the Tyndale Bible in 1526, the Coverdale Bible in 1535, the Matthew Bible in 1537, the Great Bible in 1539, the Geneva Bible in 1560, and the Bishops' Bible in 1568. Bibles were already being printed and distributed around the known world 150 before the KJV.

@@gclmedia Ok I thought their was like about 150 of them but they were only handwritten so very few people could own them ? TC

@@gclmedia Just to clarify it was passed from hand to hand but with the printing press for the first time it went worldwide. Either way, I trust it the most. Have a good night, TC.

Thank you so much for watch and engaging! I appreciate you! May I add that there is just a tad bit more nuance…The 1560 Geneva Bible, was the first and only to use the word “tyrant” to describe oppressive rulers. King James wasn’t born until June 19, 1566 (6 years after the Geneva was published) and he didn’t become King until 1603. That’s 43 years. 🤔So it definitely was not a direct slight to KJ. Earlier translations, such as the Wycliffe Bible (late 14th century) and the Tyndale Bible (early 16th century), typically used terms like “king,” “ruler,” or “prince” without the explicitly negative connotation carried by “tyrant.”

@@gclmedia thanks for the reply and info!

@@abubenadem you are most welcome! Glad I could be of value.

Blessings and thank you! What would you like me to do? Let me know and I will shot another video.

I'm confused what the second person means and I'm having trouble looking it up.

​@@oobermackn first person = one who is speaking 🗣️ second person = one who is being spoken to third person = one who is being spoken about

@@Prayer-Praise amen to that no "church" but ekklesia - call out ones...

Blessing and thank you for watching and engaging. Although the words circe/kirke may appear to be similar to "cirice," using the English Alphabet but they are NOT! Completely different etymology. The English word "church" comes from the Old English "cirice," which is derived from the Greek word "kuriakē," meaning "of the Lord." This term has no connection to the goddess from Greek mythology associated with sorcery Circe (Kirke). While the Bible does forbid sorcery and related practices, this has absolutely no bearing on the etymology of the word "church." Circe/Kirke: figure from Greek mythology, known for her magical abilities Greek Mythology: Circe | English Church: Cirice Κίρκη (Kirke) | κυριακή (kuriakē) from κύριος (kyrios)

@@gclmedia thank you but non of those words are biblical except the word Ekklesia εκκλησια - called out (ones...) All English versions have it wrong promoting a Roman Catholic concept where the clergy can control the masses with their Babylonian doctrines. This is the same with Protestant/Evangelical denominations. I am not a R/Catholic neither Protestant nor Evangelical (all with their "ism's). The Protestants/Evangelicals all claim that they are not R/Catholics but they have embraced/absorbed a large percentage of the RCC's doctrines. I am a Follower of Yashuah the Messiah (Talmiddim haMashiach)🛐🕎📜📖🐑✅️

Thank you for watching and engaging! What have you found to be a lie? What other evidences would you like for me to provide?

ua-cam.com/users/shortsjmkRi3Z8rSA?si=y-Xzc7uQxEnxdSXe

I write exhaustively about Ehyeh in my book the Name Above All Names. It’s the absolute key to begin to unlock our understanding of our Heavenly Father

Thank you so much for taking the time to watch and engage your words are too kind! I appreciate you.