I'm with ya Colton. I love the KJV. My daily read is the ESV, RSV, CSB, NIV and the NKJV. Occasionally I will consult the NLT when I am having trouble with a concept in the OT, in particular. I have also engaged the KJVO crowd on FB and it is a complete waste of time. I own a Peter Ruckman Bible and it is filled with hate and vile speech, I'm quite Jesus would not approve.
I was a KJVO for years, before I found Mark Ward's channel. He really helped me to see how wrong I was. I love the KJV and I will always use it, but I use other translations as well.
Love Mark Ward, just finished listening to his audio book on the KJV. I'll go back to only reading the KJV when they tell me how they translate it "word for word" into Telegu, Malayalam, Tamil, and Swahili. Can't be done and translators have struggled to explain words in their language they can't comprehend.
@@ThePaPappyMark Ward is toxic, a hateful effeminate spirit. Not sure why anybody would recommend Mark Ward book because it has been refuted many Times, it's a Nothing Burger.
I was a KJB Only and I still am, boring videos like this just prove that the Counter Reformation Jesuit movement of fake modern bibles have no valid Justification or Arguments for there position, they just cry victim.
I am someone who really only uses the KJV (with NKJV off and on), I agree with you that there are some horrible people online doing a lot of hate spreading and they should be rebuked at every turn. I will say this though, (and it's hard to get this point across clearly) I genuinely think those hate filled KJVO people represent like 0.01% of all KJVO in the 'real world.' Having spent years around people who exclusively use the KJV, MOST never even dream of going online looking for Bible translation videos to comment hatred on, because it's not even something they think about. Of those who do go online and watch these videos, a significant number are actively trying to counter the crazy folks from being crazy KJVO (kind of where I would put myself). My point? I agree there is KJVO out there being nasty (thats obvious), and I would join you in condemning them. I would also say however that its become almost cliche to label anyone who uses the KJV as their primary Bible as a dumb, evil, vile, nasty, backward fundie folk, who should just stop spreading hate. Here is my controversial take.... I think that latter view (that those who endorse the KJV are horrible, evil people) is far more commonly held online than the number of KJVO that are actually nasty. I have no proof of this, but I honesty think its like the same 250 people who go to like every video they can find to jump in the comments.
I hope it is clear that I do not think all those who exclusively use the KJV are horrible, evil people. I can only speak from the experience of my comments section.
@@coltonyarbro I think you did fine, you made all the disclaimers. As I stated in my initial comment, it’s hard to articulate the point I’m trying to make. Basically, I feel confident that if we grabbed 1,000 random watchers of Bible content on UA-cam and asked them about their views of people who are KJVO, they would overwhelmingly be VERY negative. So there is almost this inverse thing happening, where every UA-cam Bible video is all like “there is all this hate coming from KJVO people.” but that kind of actually creates some level of distain (I won’t say hate). So as I said, my controversial take is… the nasty KJVO people in the comments are all the same people. I genuinely think it’s like a group of a couple hundred super aggressive people that go to every video and start fights. But in response to that small group, basically everyone who strongly likes the KJV (or even dislikes aspects of modern Bibles) ends up branded as “bad.” Again, hard to really explain clearly but it’s something I’ve noticed.
The NET is beyond amazing especially if you got the full notes edition. It took me about a year to star reading it but I have used it as a resource like crazy and started reading through it on the first of September and loving the fresh look at the bible in this translation.
There are a lot of faithful translations that bring people to Christ. I enjoy NLT, NIV, NJKV for example. Translations that understood in the here and now is what passes on the Good News of the Bible as time goes on and translation and words change over time.
I wonder what KJVO think about non English Bible translations. I grew up reading my French Bible and didn’t really understand the KJV. I recently started reading the ESV and CSB and I can say I’ve finally I’ve read the whole Old Testament and I’m now reading the New Testament in English. I love understanding what I’m reading.
Well wonder no longer. The KJV was translated from the original manuscripts for English speaking people. There are other projects to translate the original manuscripts for other languages, and French is certainly one of them.
The “hyper” KJVO people believe even the original Hebrew & Greek manuscripts are inferior to the KJV. They teach that non English speaking people need to learn English, then hear the KJV Word to actually hear the Word of God. Sadly, they are converting to KJVO instead of repenting and trusting in Christ.
@@michaelmappin4425well, not quite. The KJV was a revision of the Bishop’s Bible according to the 5 editions of Erasmus, Stephanus’ 1550 and Theodore Beza’s 1590 published editions of the New Testament which were compiled from late 12th century manuscripts and only about 8 at that.
My hot take: insisting on using the KJV places an undue burden on believers. God's word takes enough effort to study and understand, we don't need to add "need to learn 17th century English" to the list. Paul wrote in the common Greek of his time, not Greek from 400 BC.
The purpose of all good translation is to translate the original biblical Hebrew and Greek back into the KJV. Obviously joking but that's sometimes the vibe I get from KJV Only! 😅
Reading the bible is hard for me because of my learning disability, I use CSB but I also like NIV but I have a hard time just staying with one version.
I once heard a pastor call the KJV the "gold standard". But that begs the question: gold standard for what? There is little doubt that it is the gold standard for historical significance (no other translation even comes close). A strong case can also be made that it is the gold standard for literary excellence. For those two reasons at least I will always hold the KJV in high - though not exclusive - regard.
If you want to make some arbitrary standard as being "gold", then the Vulgate takes it all. The actual gold standard are the manuscripts that has survived the centuries, and provide our best look at the autographs.
Well if you look into how the 47 of the KJB, Erasmus( was the most educated, and intelligent person of the last 2 millennia), and the rest of the Reformed era scholars how they were educated. They would start at 4-5 years of age, and by 6-7 years of age were fluent in Hebrew, Greek, and Latin. They would go on to learn many other languages, as adults studying 12-16 hours a day! Even King James himself was educated in this manner, though not a perfect man he loved God’s word. As he only commissioned the work of translation, and instructed them to be as accurate, and precise as possible, and they were! These men were literally experts in Biblical studies, literature, languages, history, and cultures. Hence why most people do not understand certain passages, thinking it was some sort of mistake, and when it wasn’t a mistake! In contrast most modern scholars have approximately 8 or so years of higher learning, and may know one ancient language somewhat? Minus our tech, the 47 were far superior to any modern scholar of today, they would make them look like children, infants even! Just gathering together of the 47 scholars for the translating of the KJB , in of itself was a miracle providence of God! They most certainly were guided by the Holy Ghost in their work of translation, and God’s fingerprints are found in the KJB through mathematics! So not only is the KJB a purified version of the English translations that came before, from the only true pure line of manuscripts, it is mathematically perfect. If you are a “Berean”, and want to learn more, I’ll give you a link, that absolutely proves through mathematics that the KJB is inspired! I’ll comment more in the main section on the textual basis for most modern bibles.
@@claytonsmith6148 I agree that the translators of the KJV were great scholars, but in 75% of their work, they used prior English translations. As smart as they were they were not prophets or sons of prophets. Erasmus too was a great scholar but he several mistakes in his translation. (Rev 1:8 as an example.) Plus he followed many false beliefs.
@@Purvis-dw4qf Alright you have a lot going on here? The KJB is 85% of the Tyndale Bible, sharing aspects of the Geneva, and other previous English translations, just more refined! Most TR/Majority text/ Byzantine type text, and KJB people know this. They have a great appreciation of what came before the KJB! I never said any of the 47 were prophets, but were certainly anointed to preform the task. For God most assuredly he prepared them all of their lives for this project, through the British Empire established English as the dominant language of the last days. Now as for Erasmus having made a supposed mistake, is not likely at all! Even the NASB95( in the critical text camp considered by most to be the best), matches the KJB exactly as does both Greek texts! Plus most of the manuscripts that he had( multiple dozens, and from Antioch, as well as what the reformers had)no longer exist due to fires(the Catholic Church was was known to go around burning various libraries). His library/museum testifies to this, the k j b r c . org has information about this. Erasmus was Catholic (as were most of the reformers), but in name only as he fellowshiped with Ana-Baptist, and died with them.
@@claytonsmith6148so if you don't know English you're doomed to Hell? God chose English after 1600 Years to be the only language with an inspired Bible?
KJV Only! I’m just kidding. I’ve had my fair share of interactions with the KJVO folks. I love the Bride of Christ! Even the ones I disagree with. Keep up the good work, bro!
For me, I have read many different translations, and I like the ESV and NKJV as well as some others. But I feel the KJV is the better of them. Going to the more modern translations and then going back to the KJV really made me feel like they were lacking. It could be because I had read the KJV since I was 9 years old, and that's what I know the best.
@@coltonyarbro I will admit I have watched some of the onlyists, and some are most certainly extreme in their thinking, but some are not that bad in their thinking. There are also some that really teeter totter on....I don't want to say evilness because that's quite strong of a word....but yeahh.
Its not really "KJV" only folks, it's folks that point out that one "older" text does not make it the right one. Also, textual criticism has a lot of quirks and silliness to it.
KJVO remind me of the polarizing rhetoric we see in our increasingly secular culture today. It's not good enough to have a "live and let live" attitude toward others, regardless of their lifestyle, beliefs and choices, especially regarding gender identity politics. You have to also openly embrace and endorse their alternative viewpoint otherwise you're demonized by them for having the audacity to hold different convictions and beliefs. Many KJVOs, particularly disciples of Peter Ruckman) treat non-KJVOs exactly the same way. We are treated like enemies, apostates, "Bible doubters" and all manner of vile rhetoric unfitting for believers toward one another.
I’m a part of the lgbtq community and know many kind conservative. I think both sides demonize each other and go to far when we should be more respectful to each other. Our church’s should welcome all different views divisions are never good.
Thank you for all the hard work you put into making this channel ! The fact that these so called Christians are bad mouthing you could be further evidence of their pent up anger in life and need to confess their sins daily to Jesus. This ridiculous behavior needs to be confessed. Worse - where is the Holy Spirit in their life? Hopefully they re-dedicate their lives to Jesus!!!!
I use the King James Bible because I was raised on the KJB. My father preached from the KJB and I learned to read from the KJB. I was saved under the preaching of the KJB and surrendered to preach under the KJB. That being said I can prove there are translations that are plain wrong. Being a dr of theology I can say there are other translations that are very sound. To say KJB Only, is plain wrong.
@@PreachermanPiper thanks for your comment. And I do want to clarify that I am not endorsing “all” English Bible translations. There are definitely some out then I think are not good. But really it’s the KJV Only stuff that I have a problem with.
Out of 8 billion people living in the world, only 18.2% can even read English. That makes KJVO a rather dumb idea. Or would God exclude from Grace those that speak Chichewa, Farsi, Aramaic, Tshivenda, Sepedi, Sesotho, etc.? Some people really are so smart that they don't even think. And only those badly translated English Bibles have the audacity to call God, Who is Spirit, a ghost! That is borderline blasphemy. 😢
As a person who for more than 30 years used the NASB(77&95), and a NIV(78&84) along with the KJB. All of the missing verses, passages phrases, brackets, notes etc never set well with me in my spirit? My position has become a TR/Majority text/Byzantine type text only, and KJB preferred/best. I utilize other Bibles from this line: pre-KJV reformed era Bibles, and newer ones like the NKJV, MEV, WEB, and other KJV variants ie KJVER, and Simplified KJV. So the “Berean” in me kicked in to search out the matter! I looked at pretty much everything I could find on every side, and angle. The textual basis for most modern bibles are seriously problematic at best, and are actually worse than people think! This text base is known as the Alexandrian/critical/eclectic type: Codex Alexandrinus, Codex Vaticanus, Codex Sinaiticus. So I read Jerome, he condemned the Alexandrinus as corrupt, and invoked Jewish scribble protocol which all known copies were destroyed(burned)! The Alexandrian’s were so rebellious, unrepentant, and hard hearted that they managed to bury a single copy, which is what we have today. The Vaticanus supposedly discovered in 1475 with no prior history(that’s not a red flag 🚩 at all)! When Erasmus was putting together the Greek NT, the Catholic Church wanted him to use it? After examining it he found it to be a fraudulent document, and rejected it! All the other reformed era scholars knew, and rejected it as well. Hence why it was not used in any reformed era Bible, to include the KJB. The Sinaiticus was supposedly discovered in 1844 by Constantine Tischendorf( who was a known money hungry liar), but was actually created by Constantine Simonides in 1841(he had eye witnesses). It is very interesting reading, and readily available. Also David Daniels with Chick Publications beside videos on this, and related topics, he has evidence with independent chemical testing showing that the ink, both written, and art are 19th century! The vellum is old, but not the ink! Based on this information I personally no longer use bibles from these sources. Do they have some of God’s word, yes but not all, and are greatly lacking. This doesn’t cover modern textual criticism philosophy either, which I’ll cover later. Also all the support behind the TR/Majority text/Byzantine type.
The support behind the TR/Majority text/Byzantine type text as being the only true line for Biblical texts, comes from ancient Bibles, and early Church leaders quotes. Ancient Bibles that are from the early to mid-2nd century AD:ie the Syriac, the Greek Orthodox NT, then there is the Old Latin 90-130 AD. The we have the scripture quotes from the early Church leaders from the first 4 centuries( you can actually reconstruct the Bible from their quotes). All of these match up together, with no missing verses, phrases, passages etc, along with the KJB! This shows continuity in the chain of custody in the preservation of God’s word!
Now for modern textual criticism philosophy, on the surface to many seems to be harmless? But you have to go back to the 19th century, to these two guys named Westcott & Hort. Who were non-believing Anglican priests, and were gnostics, and cultists. They hated the Bible, and Evangelicals, having written very unfavorable things on both. Everything they espoused to that essentially places doubt in God’s word. Instead of holding to the more traditional, conservative view scripture, and Church history. For the most part scholars today that are not traditionalist, have bought into this philosophy? It reminds me of Genesis 3:1 “Yea, hath God said”, bringing doubt to His word! The same old bag of tricks, lies and deception, the devil has nothing new?
i'm from Estonia and we have Bible in estonian ofc. Translated. The KJV only seems strange. Like you are saying we can't have Bible in Estonian because it's not KJV or .. what are they saying? Because my Bible is for sure not KJV or ESV. I have Bible translated to estonian language.
That's too bad. The majority of KJVO people that I know are actually quite nice and loving, and that includes the pastors. I know there are Peter Ruckman types, but in my experience they are the vast minority.
I am King James Only. I am a King James Bible Believer. Every word in the King James Bible is true, and if you were truly born again of the Holy Spirit of God, then you would know this as well. The King James Bible is God's Perfect, Preserved and Inspired Word. Ecclesiastes 8:4 Where the word of a king is, there is power: and who may say unto him, What doest thou? (King James Bible)
My grandmother doesn’t speak English, only French. Would it be ok for her to read the Word of God in French? This would mean she would be reading a different version and not the KJV.
@@McGheeBentle The Textus Receptus i.e. the Received Text which constituted the translation-base for the original German Luther Bible, the translation of the New Testament into English by William Tyndale, the King James Version, the Spanish Reina-Valera translation, the Czech Bible of Kralice, the Portuguese Almeida Recebida, the Dutch Statenvertaling, the Russian Synodal Bible and most other Reformation-era New Testament translations throughout Western, Northern and Central Europe. The French have a great history of Received Text Bibles, including the Olivetan Bible and the Ostervald Bible.
I'm with ya Colton. I love the KJV. My daily read is the ESV, RSV, CSB, NIV and the NKJV. Occasionally I will consult the NLT when I am having trouble with a concept in the OT, in particular. I have also engaged the KJVO crowd on FB and it is a complete waste of time. I own a Peter Ruckman Bible and it is filled with hate and vile speech, I'm quite Jesus would not approve.
I always felt that if the King James Bible was good enough for John the Baptist well then it’s surely good enough for me.
Pretty sure Samuel used the KJV exclusively as well
I was a KJVO for years, before I found Mark Ward's channel. He really helped me to see how wrong I was. I love the KJV and I will always use it, but I use other translations as well.
Thanks for sharing!
Love Mark Ward, just finished listening to his audio book on the KJV.
I'll go back to only reading the KJV when they tell me how they translate it "word for word" into Telegu, Malayalam, Tamil, and Swahili. Can't be done and translators have struggled to explain words in their language they can't comprehend.
@@ThePaPappyMark Ward is toxic, a hateful effeminate spirit.
Not sure why anybody would recommend Mark Ward book because it has been refuted many Times, it's a Nothing Burger.
I was a KJB Only and I still am, boring videos like this just prove that the Counter Reformation Jesuit movement of fake modern bibles have no valid Justification or Arguments for there position, they just cry victim.
I am someone who really only uses the KJV (with NKJV off and on), I agree with you that there are some horrible people online doing a lot of hate spreading and they should be rebuked at every turn.
I will say this though, (and it's hard to get this point across clearly) I genuinely think those hate filled KJVO people represent like 0.01% of all KJVO in the 'real world.' Having spent years around people who exclusively use the KJV, MOST never even dream of going online looking for Bible translation videos to comment hatred on, because it's not even something they think about. Of those who do go online and watch these videos, a significant number are actively trying to counter the crazy folks from being crazy KJVO (kind of where I would put myself).
My point? I agree there is KJVO out there being nasty (thats obvious), and I would join you in condemning them. I would also say however that its become almost cliche to label anyone who uses the KJV as their primary Bible as a dumb, evil, vile, nasty, backward fundie folk, who should just stop spreading hate.
Here is my controversial take.... I think that latter view (that those who endorse the KJV are horrible, evil people) is far more commonly held online than the number of KJVO that are actually nasty.
I have no proof of this, but I honesty think its like the same 250 people who go to like every video they can find to jump in the comments.
As there are some horrible people who criticize those who only use the KJV
I hope it is clear that I do not think all those who exclusively use the KJV are horrible, evil people. I can only speak from the experience of my comments section.
@@coltonyarbro I think you did fine, you made all the disclaimers.
As I stated in my initial comment, it’s hard to articulate the point I’m trying to make.
Basically, I feel confident that if we grabbed 1,000 random watchers of Bible content on UA-cam and asked them about their views of people who are KJVO, they would overwhelmingly be VERY negative.
So there is almost this inverse thing happening, where every UA-cam Bible video is all like “there is all this hate coming from KJVO people.” but that kind of actually creates some level of distain (I won’t say hate).
So as I said, my controversial take is… the nasty KJVO people in the comments are all the same people. I genuinely think it’s like a group of a couple hundred super aggressive people that go to every video and start fights. But in response to that small group, basically everyone who strongly likes the KJV (or even dislikes aspects of modern Bibles) ends up branded as “bad.”
Again, hard to really explain clearly but it’s something I’ve noticed.
I prefer the KJV, but I also read the NKJV, NASB77, and the CSB. I've recently purchased the NET, I haven't read it as yet. Thank you Colton!
Thank you! KJV is a timeless treasure. Thankful for people like you who prefer it, but aren’t onlyist.
The NET is beyond amazing especially if you got the full notes edition. It took me about a year to star reading it but I have used it as a resource like crazy and started reading through it on the first of September and loving the fresh look at the bible in this translation.
@@moniquewalker5412 I only have the concise notes, but when I read it, if I like it I will probably get a full notes edition. ☺️
There are a lot of faithful translations that bring people to Christ. I enjoy NLT, NIV, NJKV for example. Translations that understood in the here and now is what passes on the Good News of the Bible as time goes on and translation and words change over time.
Thank you for this video. You addressed the issue very well.
Personally I use three different bibles. I use the KJV, the NASB and the ESV and I love all three for many different reasons.
I wonder what KJVO think about non English Bible translations. I grew up reading my French Bible and didn’t really understand the KJV. I recently started reading the ESV and CSB and I can say I’ve finally I’ve read the whole Old Testament and I’m now reading the New Testament in English. I love understanding what I’m reading.
Well wonder no longer. The KJV was translated from the original manuscripts for English speaking people. There are other projects to translate the original manuscripts for other languages, and French is certainly one of them.
The “hyper” KJVO people believe even the original Hebrew & Greek manuscripts are inferior to the KJV. They teach that non English speaking people need to learn English, then hear the KJV Word to actually hear the Word of God. Sadly, they are converting to KJVO instead of repenting and trusting in Christ.
@@michaelmappin4425well, not quite. The KJV was a revision of the Bishop’s Bible according to the 5 editions of Erasmus, Stephanus’ 1550 and Theodore Beza’s 1590 published editions of the New Testament which were compiled from late 12th century manuscripts and only about 8 at that.
@@CharlesSeraphDrums I think you missed the point.
I'm a NKJV bible person. I grew up on the KJV and couldn't really understand that version. I have read the ESV but still prefer the NKJV.
NKJV is a wonderful translation.
I'm KJV, but have a slight fondness of NASB '95
KJVO seek to go back to building Babel. One language for everyone. Didn't work then and won't work now.
Especially when the fact is that words have CHANGED meanings over the past 413 years.
My hot take: insisting on using the KJV places an undue burden on believers. God's word takes enough effort to study and understand, we don't need to add "need to learn 17th century English" to the list. Paul wrote in the common Greek of his time, not Greek from 400 BC.
Totally agree
Hey can I listen to your songs as many times as I want or is it limited?
I think on band camp there is a limit before the pay wall.
@@coltonyarbro Dang. I’ve been listening to Fix My Eyes every morning since you made that video.
The best arguments for the KJV were made by Edward Hills and Theodore Letis.
Hi agree with everything you said. Great job, God Bless!
Thank you! You too!
The purpose of all good translation is to translate the original biblical Hebrew and Greek back into the KJV. Obviously joking but that's sometimes the vibe I get from KJV Only! 😅
There is something cult like about saying if you don't use my preferred 400 year old English Bible translation, you don't have the word of God.
@@joelfields9807 yep
KJV Onlyists would hate what is said in "Translators to the Reader".
Reading the bible is hard for me because of my learning disability, I use CSB but I also like NIV but I have a hard time just staying with one version.
Have you read the NLT (New Living Translation?)
@Imsaved777 no i haven't
I once heard a pastor call the KJV the "gold standard". But that begs the question: gold standard for what? There is little doubt that it is the gold standard for historical significance (no other translation even comes close). A strong case can also be made that it is the gold standard for literary excellence. For those two reasons at least I will always hold the KJV in high - though not exclusive - regard.
Does this "gold standard" pastor know that the KJV, at times, has a MINORITY reading on some places?
@@---zc4qt no, he is a good pastor and friend but has little formal education.
If you want to make some arbitrary standard as being "gold", then the Vulgate takes it all. The actual gold standard are the manuscripts that has survived the centuries, and provide our best look at the autographs.
@@PhotographyByDerekinteresting viewpoint.
Some KJV only actually believe that the translators of the KJV were their inspired writers.
Yep…unfortunately 🤦♂️
Well if you look into how the 47 of the KJB, Erasmus( was the most educated, and intelligent person of the last 2 millennia), and the rest of the Reformed era scholars how they were educated. They would start at 4-5 years of age, and by 6-7 years of age were fluent in Hebrew, Greek, and Latin. They would go on to learn many other languages, as adults studying 12-16 hours a day! Even King James himself was educated in this manner, though not a perfect man he loved God’s word. As he only commissioned the work of translation, and instructed them to be as accurate, and precise as possible, and they were! These men were literally experts in Biblical studies, literature, languages, history, and cultures. Hence why most people do not understand certain passages, thinking it was some sort of mistake, and when it wasn’t a mistake! In contrast most modern scholars have approximately 8 or so years of higher learning, and may know one ancient language somewhat? Minus our tech, the 47 were far superior to any modern scholar of today, they would make them look like children, infants even! Just gathering together of the 47 scholars for the translating of the KJB , in of itself was a miracle providence of God! They most certainly were guided by the Holy Ghost in their work of translation, and God’s fingerprints are found in the KJB through mathematics! So not only is the KJB a purified version of the English translations that came before, from the only true pure line of manuscripts, it is mathematically perfect. If you are a “Berean”, and want to learn more, I’ll give you a link, that absolutely proves through mathematics that the KJB is inspired! I’ll comment more in the main section on the textual basis for most modern bibles.
@@claytonsmith6148 I agree that the translators of the KJV were great scholars, but in 75% of their work, they used prior English translations. As smart as they were they were not prophets or sons of prophets. Erasmus too was a great scholar but he several mistakes in his translation. (Rev 1:8 as an example.) Plus he followed many false beliefs.
@@Purvis-dw4qf Alright you have a lot going on here? The KJB is 85% of the Tyndale Bible, sharing aspects of the Geneva, and other previous English translations, just more refined! Most TR/Majority text/ Byzantine type text, and KJB people know this. They have a great appreciation of what came before the KJB! I never said any of the 47 were prophets, but were certainly anointed to preform the task. For God most assuredly he prepared them all of their lives for this project, through the British Empire established English as the dominant language of the last days. Now as for Erasmus having made a supposed mistake, is not likely at all! Even the NASB95( in the critical text camp considered by most to be the best), matches the KJB exactly as does both Greek texts! Plus most of the manuscripts that he had( multiple dozens, and from Antioch, as well as what the reformers had)no longer exist due to fires(the Catholic Church was was known to go around burning various libraries). His library/museum testifies to this, the k j b r c . org has information about this. Erasmus was Catholic (as were most of the reformers), but in name only as he fellowshiped with Ana-Baptist, and died with them.
@@claytonsmith6148so if you don't know English you're doomed to Hell? God chose English after 1600 Years to be the only language with an inspired Bible?
KJV Only!
I’m just kidding. I’ve had my fair share of interactions with the KJVO folks. I love the Bride of Christ! Even the ones I disagree with.
Keep up the good work, bro!
Thank you for sharing 🕊🤍💛 glad you were able to get this off your chest brother.
Thank you kindly
For me, I have read many different translations, and I like the ESV and NKJV as well as some others. But I feel the KJV is the better of them. Going to the more modern translations and then going back to the KJV really made me feel like they were lacking. It could be because I had read the KJV since I was 9 years old, and that's what I know the best.
Thanks for sharing. I also love the KJV as well. Just not the onlyism.
@@coltonyarbro I will admit I have watched some of the onlyists, and some are most certainly extreme in their thinking, but some are not that bad in their thinking. There are also some that really teeter totter on....I don't want to say evilness because that's quite strong of a word....but yeahh.
I agtee completely !
Check out Mark Ward on the KJV Only controversy as well as related issues, Ward is great, both a scholar (PhD) and a gentleman! 😊
I’ve watched lots of Mark Ward! That dude is very helpful.
Its not really "KJV" only folks, it's folks that point out that one "older" text does not make it the right one.
Also, textual criticism has a lot of quirks and silliness to it.
KJVO remind me of the polarizing rhetoric we see in our increasingly secular culture today. It's not good enough to have a "live and let live" attitude toward others, regardless of their lifestyle, beliefs and choices, especially regarding gender identity politics. You have to also openly embrace and endorse their alternative viewpoint otherwise you're demonized by them for having the audacity to hold different convictions and beliefs. Many KJVOs, particularly disciples of Peter Ruckman) treat non-KJVOs exactly the same way. We are treated like enemies, apostates, "Bible doubters" and all manner of vile rhetoric unfitting for believers toward one another.
A sadly appropriate comparison.
I’m a part of the lgbtq community and know many kind conservative. I think both sides demonize each other and go to far when we should be more respectful to each other. Our church’s should welcome all different views divisions are never good.
Thank you for all the hard work you put into making this channel !
The fact that these so called Christians are bad mouthing you could be further evidence of their pent up anger in life and need to confess their sins daily to Jesus.
This ridiculous behavior needs to be confessed.
Worse - where is the Holy Spirit in their life?
Hopefully they re-dedicate their lives to Jesus!!!!
Thank you for you appreciation 😀
Thanks!
i am an all translation onliest! if you don’t read all translations, then you are the weird one 😂
😟😂
I'm not KJV-o (I use the NRSV) but I wouldn't delete comments...
To each there own I suppose
I use the
King James Bible because I was raised on the KJB. My father preached from the KJB and I learned to read from the KJB. I was saved under the preaching of the KJB and surrendered to preach under the KJB. That being said I can prove there are translations that are plain wrong. Being a dr of theology I can say there are other translations that are very sound. To say KJB Only, is plain wrong.
@@PreachermanPiper thanks for your comment. And I do want to clarify that I am not endorsing “all” English Bible translations. There are definitely some out then I think are not good. But really it’s the KJV Only stuff that I have a problem with.
Out of 8 billion people living in the world, only 18.2% can even read English. That makes KJVO a rather dumb idea. Or would God exclude from Grace those that speak Chichewa, Farsi, Aramaic, Tshivenda, Sepedi, Sesotho, etc.? Some people really are so smart that they don't even think. And only those badly translated English Bibles have the audacity to call God, Who is Spirit, a ghost! That is borderline blasphemy. 😢
I almost fell for the cult of KJVO! A little bit of research will show you the absurdity of the movement.
As a person who for more than 30 years used the NASB(77&95), and a NIV(78&84) along with the KJB. All of the missing verses, passages phrases, brackets, notes etc never set well with me in my spirit? My position has become a TR/Majority text/Byzantine type text only, and KJB preferred/best. I utilize other Bibles from this line: pre-KJV reformed era Bibles, and newer ones like the NKJV, MEV, WEB, and other KJV variants ie KJVER, and Simplified KJV. So the “Berean” in me kicked in to search out the matter! I looked at pretty much everything I could find on every side, and angle. The textual basis for most modern bibles are seriously problematic at best, and are actually worse than people think! This text base is known as the Alexandrian/critical/eclectic type: Codex Alexandrinus, Codex Vaticanus, Codex Sinaiticus. So I read Jerome, he condemned the Alexandrinus as corrupt, and invoked Jewish scribble protocol which all known copies were destroyed(burned)! The Alexandrian’s were so rebellious, unrepentant, and hard hearted that they managed to bury a single copy, which is what we have today. The Vaticanus supposedly discovered in 1475 with no prior history(that’s not a red flag 🚩 at all)! When Erasmus was putting together the Greek NT, the Catholic Church wanted him to use it? After examining it he found it to be a fraudulent document, and rejected it! All the other reformed era scholars knew, and rejected it as well. Hence why it was not used in any reformed era Bible, to include the KJB. The Sinaiticus was supposedly discovered in 1844 by Constantine Tischendorf( who was a known money hungry liar), but was actually created by Constantine Simonides in 1841(he had eye witnesses). It is very interesting reading, and readily available. Also David Daniels with Chick Publications beside videos on this, and related topics, he has evidence with independent chemical testing showing that the ink, both written, and art are 19th century! The vellum is old, but not the ink! Based on this information I personally no longer use bibles from these sources. Do they have some of God’s word, yes but not all, and are greatly lacking. This doesn’t cover modern textual criticism philosophy either, which I’ll cover later. Also all the support behind the TR/Majority text/Byzantine type.
The support behind the TR/Majority text/Byzantine type text as being the only true line for Biblical texts, comes from ancient Bibles, and early Church leaders quotes. Ancient Bibles that are from the early to mid-2nd century AD:ie the Syriac, the Greek Orthodox NT, then there is the Old Latin 90-130 AD. The we have the scripture quotes from the early Church leaders from the first 4 centuries( you can actually reconstruct the Bible from their quotes). All of these match up together, with no missing verses, phrases, passages etc, along with the KJB! This shows continuity in the chain of custody in the preservation of God’s word!
Now for modern textual criticism philosophy, on the surface to many seems to be harmless? But you have to go back to the 19th century, to these two guys named Westcott & Hort. Who were non-believing Anglican priests, and were gnostics, and cultists. They hated the Bible, and Evangelicals, having written very unfavorable things on both. Everything they espoused to that essentially places doubt in God’s word. Instead of holding to the more traditional, conservative view scripture, and Church history. For the most part scholars today that are not traditionalist, have bought into this philosophy? It reminds me of Genesis 3:1 “Yea, hath God said”, bringing doubt to His word! The same old bag of tricks, lies and deception, the devil has nothing new?
i'm from Estonia and we have Bible in estonian ofc. Translated. The KJV only seems strange. Like you are saying we can't have Bible in Estonian because it's not KJV or .. what are they saying? Because my Bible is for sure not KJV or ESV. I have Bible translated to estonian language.
As a new Christian, this is what I noticed about most KJV only people: they're mean.
I wish it wasn’t so
That's too bad. The majority of KJVO people that I know are actually quite nice and loving, and that includes the pastors. I know there are Peter Ruckman types, but in my experience they are the vast minority.
You shall know them by their fruit.
Check out daniel 9 verse 26😅
Look at Acts 9:4 in the KJV, LOL!!!!!!!!!
Check out hebrews 3 verse 16😅
KJV onlyism seems like idolatry.
@@gator7082 it certainly can be
lol
I see no harm in exploring multiple translations and if you can find one that really calls you to read more and enjoy the word of God then great.
I am King James Only. I am a King James Bible Believer. Every word in the King James Bible is true, and if you were truly born again of the Holy Spirit of God, then you would know this as well. The King James Bible is God's Perfect, Preserved and Inspired Word. Ecclesiastes 8:4 Where the word of a king is, there is power: and who may say unto him, What doest thou? (King James Bible)
My grandmother doesn’t speak English, only French. Would it be ok for her to read the Word of God in French? This would mean she would be reading a different version and not the KJV.
@@McGheeBentle, TR equivalents are available in every language. There are no excuses, but everyone is always looking for a loophole.
@@childofthelight888 What is TR?
@@McGheeBentle The Textus Receptus i.e. the Received Text which constituted the translation-base for the original German Luther Bible, the translation of the New Testament into English by William Tyndale, the King James Version, the Spanish Reina-Valera translation, the Czech Bible of Kralice, the Portuguese Almeida Recebida, the Dutch Statenvertaling, the Russian Synodal Bible and most other Reformation-era New Testament translations throughout Western, Northern and Central Europe. The French have a great history of Received Text Bibles, including the Olivetan Bible and the Ostervald Bible.
@@childofthelight888 So any translation using the TR is good, basically. It doesn’t just have to be the KJV.