Is the King James Version of the Bible the most accurate translation?
Вставка
- Опубліковано 14 сер 2018
- "Is the King James Version of the Bible the most accurate translation?"
Dr. Robert Plummer answers in Honest Answers | Episode 73
Resource Links:
1611 KJV Preface - "The Translators to the Reader"
archive.org/details/prefaceof...
www.kingjamesbibleonline.org/...
James White - "The King James Only Controversy"
www.amazon.com/King-James-Onl...
Book Giveaway Link HERE: gleam.io/mOVh8/honest-answers...
(ended on Tuesday August 21, 2018 @ 2pm EST)
Watch more episodes of Honest Answers here:
• Honest Answers
To find out the answer to next week's question, don't forget to SUBSCRIBE:
ua-cam.com/users/SouthernSemi...
Ask any questions about theology, ministry, or life; and have them answered honestly by Southern Seminary professors.
Submit your questions by:
Email: honestanswers@sbts.edu
Twitter: @askHonestAns
or post them in the comments below
To learn more about studying with a Southern Seminary Professor, go to www.sbts.edu
Your grace is awesome. Your love is evident. I Praise God for your wisdom in your answer. I have no doubt you would be a joy to learn from. Thank you.
Thanks Gene for watching! Dr Plummer would love to have you in his class as well!
Come visit us if you get a chance. Our next official "Preview Day" will be April 17, 2020 ( www.sbts.edu/preview ), but you can plan a personal visit any time ( www.sbts.edu/visit )
We also have a variety of ways for you to get started even if you can't relocate. Read more at www.sbts.edu/globalcampus/
Our admissions team would love to connect with you. Email admissions@sbts.edu to speak with an admissions counselor.
Ever online version that I have found, and I’ve looked at a lot, has the Song of Solomon 2:7 with the he vs the she. Any idea where I can find a pure copy?
I'm living in South Korea. My wife is Korean and we have decided to live here for a while.
You enjoy being decevied do you ?
@@truthseekerKJV Your comment on the surface is not done in love and would seem to be mean or spiteful and saddens me as a brother in Christ. As Christians we are to correct in love, if correction is truly your intent. Before we correct an erring brother we should pray for both the erring brother and for our own hearts to insure that we have the right attitude which is to "turn" an erring brother from sin. This is a humble action by the corrector. There can be no pride. This is a Biblical form of correction, which you would know since you read your Bible, God's Holy Word. We are to use God's word to teach so I would expect an intelligent response from a brother or sister in Christ and not just being put down for my comment. I would expect to be shown in love why I am Biblically wrong, not just some brother's feelings about a subject. I also assume you are a Christian who reads their Bible daily since you are responding to this video and my comment about the video. I would also expect, since you are commenting, that you have done an extensive amount of your own intelligent research about word-for-word translations and are probably comfortable in both Greek and Hebrew since these are the original languages of the Bible, not English. You should also have a familiarity with Latin since the Bible was also translated into Latin long before it was translated into English and we get most of our English from Latin and Greek. I would also hope that you understand that there were 17 revisions to the KJV and the one that is now used is not even in the original "old-English" it was first published in. It's true. You could say the KJV in use today is an English translation of an "Old English" translation. I would expect a brother in Christ to have an explanation for all the other non-English translations (like Chinese or German) and why those translations are not adequate since they aren't KJV translations. (?) Do the KJV-only people expect the world to learn King James English before they learn modern English? Would the Gospel message have to be given in King James English to be effective? Fact is; I have never heard a sermon in King James English, only English. Yes, during prayers, I hear the "thee's and thou's" but none of the truly King James English.
Study to show yourself an approved workman who can rightly divide God's Word comes to mind. Please don't forget that without love we are just a sounding gong. You don't want to be just making noise which frankly is what your comment is, just some really sad noise against another brother in Christ.
The Holy Spirit is the best revealer of truth.
Holy Spirit does not contradict his inspired word, though.
@@theoldpilgrimway9129 he does
The Bible has been horribly translated by clerks of a certain denomination who had no clue about God's intend, just like Muhammed.
Still the red line is clearly visible. The original text is crystal clear:
1: God created us after His own image and likeness.
2: Man fell. That is what you see in this world: lust, greed, selfishness, strange philosophies, sicknesses, corruption, terrorism, death, etc, etc.
3: God, the spirit of life, manifests fully in Christ, pays the debt for mankinds fall so we can be indwelled again by His Spirit and be transformed back to origin.
Pure grace, love, power of God for His creation.
Hence the divine healing miracles and casting out of demons His first friend, i and many others experience up to this day!
When Jesus said: "It is finished", He did a perfect job. Nothing to be changed by people comming after Him.
Some examples of these idiotic translation errors.
Saved, from the Greek Sozo means made complete, brought back to origin.
Eternal life from the Greek Zoë means life of God, divine life.
Wrath from the Greek Orge means PASSION.
Wrath from the Greek Thumos also means PASSION.
Etc, etc, etc, look it up in the Kittel Theological Dictionary or in any Greek/Hebrew Strong's app. It's there.
So now we have ignorant preachers parotting the lie that we have to be saved from God's wrath by Jesus (who is God....) and "have to repent or go to hell".
In stead it is: God restores us through Christ by His own atoning blood sacrifice and indwelling Holy Spirit, from mankind's fall, to His own image and likeness (Christlikeness) because of... passion.
For God so loved the world....
God cannot be tempted to do evil....
There is no turning or shifting with Him....
If you don't love you don't know God, for God is love....
The goal of all instruction is... love
The Father Himself loves you....
Jesus healing all..... love
Jesus raising the dead..... love
Jesus casting out demons.... love
Jesus controlling nature..... love
Etc, etc ,etc ,etc.
Amen
@@jesusdeity2010 why can't both of the things be true. John was the one who prepare the way for Jesus and he preached repentance. And Jesus taught love and redemption but said we had to make a choice. What you said pastors teach and your rebuttal is summed up in John 3:16-21.
THIS 👏🏾👏🏾👏🏾
Spanish (Latin root) is my first language , English second. When I became a Christian I started to read the KJB and loved the majestic vocabulary of that era .I find that as culture becomes corrupt so does the language, truth becomes blurred and we lose the way to communicate with each other.
Seeet
Sweet
👍👏👏👏
though you could argue that culture today is less corrupt than in 1611. One word from the King back then and you were dead meat. I don't think King Charles has that kind of power today.
So true! Well said, brother.👍🌿
I agree with almost everything that was said, but I think one thing was left out: that it is possible to have a "bad" modern translation. For example, a translation made by a single translator, or one made for a specific denomination to conform to their biases, these could be bad translations, or at least worthy of suspicion.
I just watched a video about the Mirror Bible the other day. It's literally a New Age Bible written specifically to confirm the beliefs of a cultish New Age religion... Crazy.
Some might say the same about Passion, I don't know too much about it, but I hear it uses a lot of colourful words that weren't in the original manuscripts just to make it sound "nice". I could be wrong, but that's what i heard...
New World Translation (Jehovas Witnesses lol)
King James could be blamed for continuing to manipulate scripture to support the trinity doctrine. All bibles should be under fire.
He did mention in other video about "bad" translations like New World Translation. Maybe we can add The Passion Translation. I'm not into The Message.
Agreed. Common sense with dictate that if you have two English versions that are not the same, then we ought to reasonably conclude that either one of them is wrong or both of them are. They cannot both be good versions of they have different texts (or lack thereof), we have to be able to determine through God's wisdom which one is right.
As an Hispanic, I choose to read KJV. My primary language is Spanish. I decided to read in English and I started off with NLT in which I thought it was a very good translation. But when I read the KJV, they’re is something special in that translation that made/makes an impact in my life, versus reading newer translations that amplify a little too much and takes away the purity of what God spoke. (I am not a KJV onlyist)
Don't be afraid of labels, we all are One God, One Holy Spirit and One faith believers, we just believe there is One Holy Bible that God keeps pure Ps 12:6. PS- keep out the stuff they get in the other translations like 2Sam21:19(someone other than David kills Goliath) , Mark 9:29 has a incorrect method of exorcism, John 5:4 is missing ... and that's just a few!
So sad to see how narrow minded people like you really believe that God himself wrote the KJV of the Bible himself. Do your research. Learn the truth of how flawed the KJV Bible is.
@@josephpchajek2685 yeah it’s kind of my go to bible look ups
@@dantombs5697out of curiosity- which kjv do you read? If I understand it correctly the current kjv is the 1789 revision? I know of at least one pastor who uses 1611 only. I prefer the nkjv. I feel most secure reading anything textus receptus based
@@marvinthemartian6788 I guess I’m not that retentive, I don’t even know which version I read. Just the kjv
So many died to bring us the English translation! I love the KJV personally
Dan K :
The KJV is an early 17th century Anglican translation with many errors.
Here's 10 errors in the KJV:
1. KJV: "robbers of churches." Acts 19:37
Greek: HIEROSULOUS, "robbers of temples"
2. KJV: "Lucifer" Is 14:12
Hebrew: "O Day Star" (Lucifer is a human origin nickname for the Devil in the 1600's refers not to the devil but the king of Babylon)
3. KJV: "Easter" Acts 12:4
Greek: "Passover"
4. KJV: "Tithes of all I possess" Lk 18:12
Greek: "all I acquire"
5. KJV: "Schoolmaster" Gal 3:24
Greek: "attendant"
6. KJV: "God save the King": 1Sam 10:24, 2Sam 16:16, 1Kings 1:25
Hebrew: "May the king live" ( reflects the British culture of the 1600's. Proof that the translators used dynamic equivalents.)
7. KJV: "God Forbid." Ro. 3:4,6,31; 6:2,15; 7:7,13; 9:14; 11:1,11; 1 Co. 6:15; Ga. 2:17; 3:21; 6:14
Greek: "may it not be" or "let it not be." (KJV adds the word God where it is absent in the TR because it was a common expression in 1600's.)
8. KJV: "sweet savour" Lev. 6:21; 8:28; 17:6; 23:18
Hebrew: "soothing aroma"
9. KJV: "ashes upon his face" 1 Kings 20:38
Hebrew: "bandage over his eyes" (KJV varies from TR by using ashes)
10. Mark 7:19b. The KJV has the Lord Jesus making a statement about excretion ("purging all meats").
Greek: the actual translation should be something like "Thus he declared all foods clean" (ESV).
Covenant Caswell It has no errors whatsoever. You do realise everything you just quoted is still translated correctly. God forbid, oh it’s an error because let it not be so. That is the same thing. For someone to think Gods perfect word is corrupt and has errors cannot stand on his word.
thats a good point, i'd be interested to hear how many people died for the sake of the NIV or NASB
Tyndale died 1km from my house.
Covenant Caswell
Those can literally be interpreted the exact same.
I started reading KJV when I was 10 and I have chosen to stick to it - although I reference some other translations from time to time. I rely on the Holy Spirit to teach me. I agree that English language has changed in 400 years and no translation is perfect. However, my observation and concern is that some so called modern day translations have in a sense, appear to water down the gospel, perhaps in order to accommodate "modern day culture". Example is Isaiah 7;14 where one version says "a young woman shall conceive" rather than a young virgin.
I 100% agree with you brother I'm gonna buy a authorized KJV.
@@christopherbrewer4421 I have compared the text of the KJV to the original Greek and Hebrew using an Interlinear Bible.. which shows the foreign language and below each word.. is the translation of each word into English.. and I have found.. the KJV to be the most accurate to what the Hebrew or Greek word used originally.. was.. so I have to disagree with you on that argument...and on the argument of which manuscripts are best.. read Lee Stroebels "A case for Christ".. in this book he interacts with professors who have studied these manuscripts professionally and teach on them...and most professors proficient in the original writrings.. agree that the older manuscripts however flawed they may be are more accurate than ones written hundreds of years after Christ....... Newer does Not always mean better.. it means there is more of a chance for errors..and another tidbit... I read that Tishendorff.. who is acclaimed to have found manuscripts in a monastery around 1840.. which came to be used for most Anglican (Catholic).. translations of the bible..found these manuscripts. in a trash heap.. discarded by the monks.. since even the Monks did Not believe them to be true...my belief is that Westcott and Hort perhaps had the same mindset..perhaps it was more about becoming famous for these men.. instead of doing the Right thing?...
And here inlies the hipocritc well being
@@christopherbrewer4421 let's take a look at some of the deviate ideas in the hearts of men today that were unheard of 400 years ago....
gender neutality.... who would have ever thought THIS would be an issue?
replacing the word Hell with Sheol or Hades
calling a young virgin a young woman .. which she is .......but lets just call a spade a spade for cryin out loud.. don't soften it...
Ass.. meant ...donkey.. so what?.
Gay.. meant ..happy..so WHAT?.
God called Adam and Eve both ADAM...this was changed to MAN.. in some translations...
John 2:4 from "What have I to do with thee?".. to "what does that have to do with us?"
@@jeffcarlson3269 Whatever interlinear you are using is still a translation. It is still a compilation of texts with english words chosen as 'translations'. if your methodology was sound, godly seminaries (if such a thing can be said) would simply issue interlinear Bibles instead of teaching Greek and Hebrew in ancient context. Perhaps I'm missing the point you're trying to make. but i want to urge you to look into whether 'an interlinear Bible' is actually 'original Greek and Hebrew', and if it is 'original', then what manuscript is it using and what english choices are being made and why. The fact is we have more manuscripts now than when the KJV was created. that means we can compare more manuscripts throughout a wider time range and figure out what things were original, what was added, where errors were made, and get an idea of what is reliable. AND, we have a better understanding of ancient language meaning we can more accurately translate meaning, knowing for example when poetic or artistic phrases or figures of speech are used that lose meaning between ancient cultures and 'ours'. i encourage you to search for and watch: "Dr. James White: Which Bible translation is the most reliable? Episode 1326" on wretched's yt channel. then verify the claims.
Bottom line, it is not a question of whether the words chosen in the KJV to translate the texts they used in the translation were best according to our understanding today. that's not the point and assumes the sources they used were reliable. the question and the point is whether the text source they used were accurate/reliable to begin with. the answer to that seems to be no. this is why there are extra verses and different meanings found in the KJV (especially before it has been revised) compared to the more reliable translations.
I come from India, I’ve delighted in the King James Bible since childhood, it is authenticity, majestic in English literature. Many rise to diminish it, but it shall remain as the crown of all English translation. “It fainteth not, nor fadeth even in the passing age and time.
I am from England, the country of origin for the KJV. The KJV does fail. There are older manuscripts than the Masoretic Hebew text which is about 900AD. Parts of the Dead Sea Scrolls are 200BC, a difference of 1100 years. I prefer the modern translations like the NASB or ESV.
My ESV has footnotes every time the Septuagint is used because the Hebrew is unclear. Now where is the KJV footnotes? They don't exist.
I would not use the KJV.
@@stephenhowe4107 The first sentiment of Englishman ought to be King James Bible, it’s birth was in the midst of persecution and martyrdom of saints and particularly during the era of Englands Church history. The King James Bible holds the very prominent piece of the history and the heart of men and for its noble and kingly literature. I shan’t forsake. Perhaps there are scores of references and expository study materials to learn. The new translations are merely for the convenience of the lay man, since the modern man is poor in literature.
@@TheAnish01 : _The first sentiment of Englishman ought to be King James Bible_
No. My first allegiance is the set of oldest Greek and Hebrew documents, they constitute the Bible, not a particular translation.
Left out this talk was the work of William Tyndale, who more than anyone, brought the Bible in English to common people. And the English Establishment persecuted this man to his death. He was a martyr. the KJV, in some senses would not exist if it wasn't for Tyndale.
But I would not use the KJV in case I am doctrinally influenced the wrong way.
_The new translations are merely for the convenience of the lay man, since the modern man is poor in literature_
No. The new translations are closer to the Bible in terms of Greek & Hebrew and therefore superior. Translation and understanding has got better since the KJV.
I was reading the updated translation notes for the NIV 2011 edition since the NIV 1970 and I was pleasantly surprised at the detail and sharpening of the language.
For example the translators now understood that Joesph's coat was an *ornate coat* and that was in keeping with Mesopotamian culture of the time.
Where is the equivalent sharpening of the KJV language? Nowhere.
As a work of literature of the time, yes maybe it can be appreciated. But I would not use the KJV to infer biblical doctrine. It is now, no longer good enough.
And the chances are 100 years from now, we will even newer superior translations, because Biblical manuscripts are being discovered every year. The majority are newer documents, but there is always a chance for an older document to be discovered that is older than what we have.
A small percentage of the Old Testament is written in Aramaic.
The chances are Jesus understood 4 languages: Hebrew and Aramaic but also Greek and Latin
Stick with your KJV, it flows from Antioch. These post-1881 Bibles flow from EGYPT.
@@stephenhowe4107 Inspite of the improvements in the modern translations, I’m keen in the literary style of the very literature. It is satisfactory to soul as the King James presents. Every argument to defeat King James has prevailed not but in futility. For it is the largest selling translation in the world till today. Perhaps satan himself envy’s its outreach, he must have employed some within the Christian circle to render void of its value.
Are there differences that matter among the translations? Do they deliver the same message?
My main language is Spanish and I understand the "archaic" King James just fine.
The KJV agrees with many languages as it has all the correct grammar at the end of words. One of the best ESL tools in the world.
The Driver I am a native English speaker and I don’t. You must read it all the time. That’s the only way to know it that well. People who don’t read it all the time have a naturally hard time understanding it. As you probably would reading seventeenth century Spanish.
@@jordandthornburg What a joke. You do know The Lord WANTS us to read the bible all the time, right?
"Study to shew thyself approved unto God, a workman that needeth not to be ashamed, rightly dividing the word of truth." 2 Timothy 2:15
"And be not conformed to this world: but be ye transformed by the renewing of your mind, that ye may prove what is that good, and acceptable, and perfect, will of God." Romans 12:2
You know how many phrases in the KJV are commonly used today? Like "I'm at my wit's end," "It's beyond me," "Rise and shine," "See eye to eye" or simple words like the word "mart?" Where do we see mart today? Walmart? Kmart? Steinmart? Yet they have to "update" the word "mart" in new versions to other words/phrases that don't even make sense. And simple words in the KJV like "white of an egg" get updated to "slime of the purslane" or "juice of the mallow" in Job 6:6. "Weight" gets updated to "encumbrance." "Crown" gets updated to "diadem." The list goes on.
But unto the wicked God saith, What hast thou to do to declare my statutes, or that thou shouldest take my covenant in thy mouth? Seeing thou hatest instruction, and casteth my words behind thee. Psalm 50:16-17
Stop making excuses and get to reading. It's easy to read when you put in the effort to study it (again, 2 Timothy 2:15). If you don't understand a word you can get a dictionary. Webster's 1828 dictionary online is a useful tool.
Hey brother funny how they only attacked the King James Bible all the new age perversion s are okay with those guys happy to see you here I'm glad I'm not the only one that stands up for the old black book
ImBizzyRightlyDividing I do read the Bible all the time. I don’t read it in a language I don’t understand that is silly
God will protect his Word believe it or not
yes, He will. He will protect His Word from having words added to it.
Guilherme Coelho : what about words taken from it by man and Satan? Would He not restore those words before He comes back, so we don’t stumble, so our judgement is just?
God gave his word to man. For man to keep. Man has done a piss-poor job of it! Starting with allowing Constantine to dictate exactly what the church was going to look like, and deifying him as much as possible. So much so that the Catholics eventually ignored a lot of parts of the Bible because certain churches wouldn't comply with Constantine's order.
@ it goes a lot deeper. Churches, primarily the Catholic church, but others were involved, use Biblical scripture as reason to destroy knowledge that set us back thousands of years. Not only knowledge of God. But knowledge of astrophysics, engineering, etc etc etc.
@ are you Church of Christ?
What version do you use now?
What do you think of the NIV Bible?
I love how careful and considerate his answer is to this question. Thank you Dr. Plummer for taking the time to address this question, though I'm sure it is a thankless endeavor.
Obvious he wants to be loved by the world.
“If ye were of the world, the world would love his own: but because ye are not of the world, but I have chosen you out of the world, therefore the world hateth you.”
John 15:19 KJV
450 version that are “so called” bibles
How many versions of the US constitution are there?! I bet if there were half the amount of constitutional docs as there are bibles. This country would implode rapidly, just like the Christian church is today. Think about it.
We need Gods word Luke 4.4
And basically if you study this issue and accept the other versions as this fool does and teaches. the final conclusion is that you accept “inspiration” WITH OUT preservation. Psalms 12:6,7
@@RedSp4de - Friend, you will not find any agreement with me on this issue here. I believe strongly in "preservation", which is why I believe that God continues to protect the work of translation today. Go ahead and write me off as a flaming heretic if you want; I do not care what you think because I'm no respecter of men.
False prophets often speak beautifully.
@@RedSp4de sigh. The "them" he shall preserve is masculine. The "words" are femine. Hebrew grammar demands gender of noun matches pronoun. The "them" refers to Gods people/the poor and needy. Preservation is a true doctrine. That passage doesnt teach it. especially as it says he shall preserve them from THIS generation forevermore. That means he wasnt preserving what came before that psalm was written by that logic. Which is flawed. And why the kjv? Why not the Geneva or some prior english translation?
ProvokingThought ok smart guy.
When were the vaticanus and sinaiticus discovered/ or re discovered ?
If YHVH wants you to know the truth no man can keep it from you.
What? Where? When? What middle age are you speaking about?
King James was a flaming homosexual.
Sir Walter Raleigh, a prominent member of the royal court, once quipped that “We have had King Elizabeth; now we have Queen James."
Is that why he gave us the KJV?
@@lewyndenley6381 A panel of scholars was picked by King James I of England to reach a consensus as to a different translation of the text of the Bible.
In other words, the translation was voted on.
There were other translations that were favored by the scholars that simply didn’t make the cut.
They were all inspired to make their own individual conclusions.
This is how you arrive at a CONSENSUS of opinion.
@@lewyndenley6381 It was a small group of scholars who gave King James I a new translation of the Bible.
Instead of the argument that modern translations deleted words and verses, another argument is that KJV added words and verses
I'm personally very fond of the Geneva Bible as a Reformed Baptist because it was the translation my English and Northern Irish ancestors used during the Protestant Reformation and related events thereafter, such as the English Civil Wars and their settlement of New England and Appalachia, respectively. Their breakaway from Roman Catholicism via their reading the scriptures and establishing their own churches accordingly inspired solely by scripture have given it a very special place in my heart knowing that the same blood present in those acts of faith runs through my body.
The problem with that is availability. It kind of made a brief comeback a couple years ago or so but is fading again. I got a bonded leather version for something like $40, now if you can find them they're 2 or 3 times that. That said I read the ESV.
My issues come from little things sometimes. Let's take a look at two very simple, rather subtle alterations between the King James Version and the New King James Version.
(KJV)
“Look not thou upon the wine when it is red, when it giveth his colour in the cup, when it moveth itself aright. At the last it biteth like a serpent, and stingeth like an adder. Thine eyes shall behold strange women, and thine heart shall utter perverse things.” - Proverbs 23:31-33
(NKJV)
“Do not look on the wine when it is red,
When it sparkles in the cup, When it swirls around smoothly; At the last it bites like a serpent,
And stings like a viper. Your eyes will see strange things,
And your heart will utter perverse things.” - Proverbs 23:31-33
Now there were minor, and rather insignificant changes made here like KJV's "adder" changed to the NKJV's "viper". KJV's "gives it's colour" changes to NKJV's "sparkles in the cup". Not really terrible changes and not really damaging, I'll agree. However... There is one change that, in my opinion, changes things quite a bit. In the KJV, the verse says that when you drink alcohol, "Your eyes shall behold strange women" while the NKJV says "Your eyes will see strange things". WHOA... These two things are VERY different. The words "women" and "things" are clearly very different. This one change almost seems to alter the entire context or meaning of the verse. "Women" is very specific and a deliberate word choice while "things" is incredibly broad and could mean a wide variety of things. I believe the KJV is warning about ADULTERY or at least, fornication. A "strange woman" is NOT your wife. But the NKJV says "things" which is non-descriptive and could be used to represent a whole slew of things.
This is one problem I ran into with the NKJV. There seem to be small changes that are not only unnecessary, but might actually take away from the intended context of the verse. Another I found was in Romans.
(KJV)
“But God be thanked, that ye were the servants of sin, but ye have obeyed from the heart that form of doctrine which was delivered you. Being then made free from sin, ye became the servants of righteousness.” - Romans 6:17-18
(NKJV)
“But God be thanked that though you were slaves of sin, yet you obeyed from the heart that form of doctrine to which you were delivered. And having been set free from sin, you became slaves of righteousness.” - Romans 6:17-18
Here, the word "servant" found in the KJV has been changed to "slave" in the NKJV. Now this doesn't seem like that big of a deal, and maybe it's not to most people. But, call me a perfectionist because it bothers me. A slave and a servant are not the same thing. It seems yet another change that really is unnecessary. Allow me to provide you the definitions for these two words.
SERV'ANT
- A person, male or female, that attends another for the pupose of performing menial offices for him, or who is employed by another for such offices or for other labor, and is subject to his command. The word is correlative to master. Servant differs from slave, as the servant's subjection to a master is voluntary, the slave's is not. Every slave is a servant but every servant is not a slave.
- A person who voluntarily serves another or acts as his minister;
- One who yields obedience to another.
SLAVE, (noun)
- A person who is wholly subject to the will of another; one who has no will of his own, but whose person and services are wholly under the control of another. In the early state of the world, and to this day among some barbarous nations, prisoners of war are considered and treated as slaves. The slaves of modern times are more generally purchased, like horses and oxen.
A servant does his duty and his or her service of their own free will. We serve God and Christ because we WANT to, not because we HAVE to. A slave has no such choice. They do what they do and perform their service and duty because someone is forcing it onto them. These two things are very different. Now I know that most of you just "get it", right? But some people don't. There are people who use these kind of things in arguments AGAINST the faith. How many atheists will say that Christians are "slaves"? And when our own Bibles are actually calling us slaves to God, that only supports their argument. This is why I have issues with modern translations really. Things like modern sentence structure and what not are... Eh. But not really criminal. It's the changing of words like THESE examples that bother me. "Women" to "things" and "Servants" to "Slaves". I have a problem with that because it changes things and it can change the intended purpose of the verses being read. That's the way I see it.
(I do own a NKJV Bible and I do use it. In my opinion, it is the best "alternative" translation to the KJV. I suppose that is because for the most part, it IS the KJV. Only there are little changes to wording. There are many verses left perfectly in tact. I will say this: I will always prefer the KJV. HOWEVER... I won't forbid someone to read the NKJV as it IS useful. For the most part, it is compatible with the KJV in most every way. And, I will admit that numbers of the word changes are not "criminal". I will ALWAYS have my issues with other modern translations. Of that I am sure. There seem to be too many problems with some of them. So, I suppose to put it clearly, I am not exactly a KJV Only Man. BUT, I am a KJV/NKJV guy. I don't like to go anywhere but those two places.
I purchased an NKJV Bible for my younger brother because the KJV's wording is archaic and old-world (one of several reasons I love it). I chose the NKJV because it is the closest to the KJV you'll get. It is not an awful translation brothers and sisters. It really isn't. I will say that I am glad that I knew the KJV first though. When I read the verses I listed above in the NKJV, I recognized the changes immediately because I had already read them in the KJV. Had I not done that, I would not have noticed. I would not give my brother a translation of the Bible I thought would be bad for him. I can assure you of that. One reason I even purchased my NKJV Bible is because I wanted to check it out for myself and "proof read it". And, while I found things I was kind of bothered by, I was delighted to find that much of the KJV was preserved. Again, I would not have gotten a copy for my brother if I thought it wasn't worth it.)
Sebastian concerning the second one, look into the original word used, and I might be willing to bet it was Slave. New Bible translations are know for translating the original word which means slave, as servant or bond servant.
Well said .. i would like to know more.. Have you thought of intent.. i mean why change it .. if it fits a narrative or destroys one.. why ? Who does this change hurt or benifit ...? Honest question..
Or else why do it..? unnecessary u say.. but i think its more malevolent...
@@jesseayotte6925 the original word doesn't exist. Do you have it? The minority text is not the original or even accurate. They don't agree among themselves. The majority text does. The majority text is from the original
ַ ל 23:31
al
must-not-be
־
-
תֵּ רֶ א
thra
you-are-staring
יַיִ ן
iin
wine
כִּ י
ki
that
יִ תְ אַ דָּ ם
ithadm
he-is-being-sred
כִּ י
ki
that
־
-
יִ תֵּ ן
ithn
he-is-giving
K
בַּ כִּ יס
b·kis
in·the·purse
Look not thou upon the
wine when it is red, when it
giveth his colour in the cup,
[when] it moveth itself
aright.
31
Q
בַּ כּ
ס
b·kus
in·the·cup
עֵ ינ
oin·u
sparkle-of·him
יִ תְ הַ לֵּ .
ithelk
he-is-swalking
בְּ מֵ ישָׁ רִ ים
b·mishrim
in·equities
:
:
אַ חֲ רִ ית
23:32
achrith·u
last-of·him
כְּ נָחָ שׁ
k·nchsh
as·serpent
יִ שָּׁ .
ishk
he-shall-bite
וּכְ צִ פְ עֹ נִ י
u·k·tzphoni
and·as·viper
יַפְ רִ שׁ
iphrsh
he-shall-cspread
:
:
At the last it biteth like a
serpent, and stingeth like an
adder.
32
עֵ ינֶי 23:33
oini·k
eyes-of·you
יִ רְ אוּ
irau
they-shall-see
זָר
ת
zruth
strange-things
וְ לִ בְּ
u·lb·k
and·heart-of·you
יְ דַ בֵּ ר
idbr
he-shall-mspeak
תַּ הְ פֻּכ
ת
thephkuth
waywardnesses
:
:
Thine eyes shall behold
strange women, and thine
heart shall utter perverse
things.
The Proverbs text should read strange woman. The same Hebrew (zarowt) word in Proverbs 22:14 is translated strange woman.
In Romans the the Greek word is doulos it should be translated slaves. Servants are not in bondage slaves are in bondage. The proper Greek word for servant would be diakonon or deacon.
I needed this, thank you!
I just wanted to ask people in the comments, is the Revised standard version(RSV) have you dealt with error with it??
Came across this channel looking fir resonance and an answer to my prayer for clarity. Have been going through a crisis of faith. Thank you.
If you remove a verse that should instantly disqualify your translation, right? Also God is a numbers guy how do the different versions break down according to the numbers? As in does it have the ability to get the most accurate instances of blank is there 777 times, 490 times, etc etc. Just wondering, 2nd Timothy 2 15 says were supposed to study and i am new at this.
To your first question: no, not really. We have found so many new manuscripts in the past 400 years. Many much older and more reliable than the ones that were available in the early 1600's. So oftentimes it happens that in more reliable manuscripts a particular reading is missing or is different. So the translators are bound by their conscience to reflect that in their translation.
I love the KJV for the poetical structure.
Modern English: Woman. Why are you crying?
KJV: Woman, why weepest thou?
So pretty. But the best English translation is the one you'll read. 😊
I never really thought about that, you're right the King James Version does have a poetic-like feel to it 🙂
Would you still recommend the esv version today with the 2016 change in Genesis 3:16
Just looked it up. That's odd. Contradicts the KJV, YLT, Green's literal, OJB, NASB, NIV, CSB, RSV, Spanish, French, German, Greek Septuagint, Vulgate...
And as it turns out, it contradicts the Hebrew.
But personally, I wouldn't recommend the ESV because of its diction and its sub-par prose (the English itself).
And Moses took the blood, and sprinkled it on the people, and said, Behold the blood of the covenant, which the LORD hath made with you concerning all these words.
NIV Moses then took the blood, sprinkled it on the people
YLT And Moses taketh the blood and spinkleth it on the people...
NASB So Moses took the blood and sprinkled it on the people
ESV: Then Moses took the blood and threw it on the people...
There are many cases like this. It's awful writing (the English itself)
Do you have any sources? Any at all?
If you found the oldest dollar bill in the house of a famous counterfeiter from the time its dated, it brings into question if the bill was authentic when it was made. Older manuscripts don't constitute better if the place they are found is controversial.
Andrew I Yeah but, we’re not talking about One single Bill in a potential counterfeiter’s house. We’re talking about nearly 6k bills of widely varying background and timeframes. Nowadays it would be more feasible to cast doubt, but the closer you get to the happenings of the actual events in ancient times the better. The lack of internet in that time is a huge benefit to us in terms of authenticity preserved. One of the major faults of us in the modern day is to think that we know things better than the people that preceded us, when in actuality, the people closer to the original events definitely knew it better. I’m not talking about grasping the greater picture of events, in which case our hindsight often serves us better in looking back.
@@toferyo7473 when you do a little research you'll find that the Alexandrian text type comprises 3 to 5 percent of the extant texts (depending on who you read) and the Byzantine text type around 93 percent. The Alexandrian varies much more and more widely within itself than the Byzantine. KJV advocates say that the Alexandrian texts were "corrected" by people (most notably the Gnostics). If true, then these texts are corrupt and should not be used for translation purposes despite that fact that they are older.
@@toferyo7473 Older doesn't mean better. The oldest manuscripts were found nowhere close to Greece or Israel. They were found in territories where the surrounding cultures could have easily influenced change in the text. By saying age is a more significant factor than location ignores the fact that cults have always existed. They didn't just start popping up at the 10th century. Paul himself was fighting against people trying to corrupt his teachings in the first century. Every manuscript found in st Catherines monastery cannot be verified because its region is way too questionable.
@@toferyo7473 Not to mention that the newer manuscripts that agree more thoroughly with each other number by the thousands and were found all around that side of the world. There is no possible way they all link back to the oldest ones found outside of the new testament territory. The oldest manuscripts even disagree with eachother more than the manuscripts in the majority text.
"Alexandrian" here refers to a text type and not a place.
Great video! No other issue could possibly compete with this one when it comes to getting people to completely abandon their reason and common sense. The proof is in the comment section. Translation worship is very unbecoming...
Larry Anderson it would seem you didn't actually read the comment section but just assumed what people would be saying. I don't see a bunch of translation worship. your remark makes no sense.
@@AnHebrewChild i’ve been going through the comment section and have found there’s actually a lot of translation worship.
I have a NIV bible from 2011 and I've noticed that when using audio bible or the app they have changed certain words
This is one of the most helpful videos I’ve ever watched. Thanks for creating this content.
For all my Bible classes in college, we were required to use a minimum of 3 translations for every assignment. Found it helpful.
Lies again? Semen Sperm Kran Ji
Dr Plummer -
I was born and brought up in a family that practices Sorcery and Witchcraft. Gratefully, my parents were encountered by GOD that both of them decided to follow Christ Jesus through the waters of baptism.
My first copy of the Bible is KJV.
I love the cadence of the King's English, but I have difficulty comprehending it.
Because of my voracious apetite to learn the Word, I acquired different versions, i.e., NIV, NASB, RSV, and the Paraphrased translation, gift from Logos.
I completed reading the entire Scriptures, the four versions, in three months.
My conversion experience was not induced because someone shared John 3:16. The Book of Romans "spoke" to me. I saw the tongues of fire in Hell. But, what brought me to drop prostrate is the passage that where sin abounds, God's grace abound the more. I was overwhelmed.
You are endowed with the ministry gift of teaching.
GOD be praised!
As brethrens in Christ, brother, I must warn you that Satan would love to trick you and my brother, I refuse to let him hurt you or deceive you. Remember there are false gospels he has perverted and deceived many, I plead with you please beware he doesnt trick you from GOD. Read below, beloved of the LORD.
1 Paul, an apostle, (not of men, neither by man, but by Jesus Christ, and God the Father, who raised him from the dead;)
2 And all the brethren which are with me, unto the churches of Galatia:
3 Grace be to you and peace from God the Father, and from our Lord Jesus Christ,
4 Who gave himself for our sins, that he might deliver us from this present evil world, according to the will of God and our Father:
5 To whom be glory for ever and ever. Amen.
6 I marvel that ye are so soon removed from him that called you into the grace of Christ unto another gospel:
7 Which is not another; but there be some that trouble you, and would pervert the gospel of Christ.
8 But though we, or an angel from heaven, preach any other gospel unto you than that which we have preached unto you, let him be accursed.
9 As we said before, so say I now again, if any man preach any other gospel unto you than that ye have received, let him be accursed.
10 For do I now persuade men, or God? or do I seek to please men? for if I yet pleased men, I should not be the servant of Christ.
11 But I certify you, brethren, that the gospel which was preached of me is not after man.
12 For I neither received it of man, neither was I taught it, but by the revelation of Jesus Christ.
Galatians 1:1 - 12
1611 King James Version (KJV)
@@invaderzim1265 Especially the false gospel of KJV onlyism. One of Satan's most subtle deceptions.
I have multiples of the KJV, NKJV, ESV, NASB, NIV, MEB, and Geneva 1599. I even have a New Oxford Annotated Bible, which was a textbook from college. I spend time in pretty much all of them. While the ESV and NASB are my favorites, I still find myself going back to the KJV during virtually all of my Bible studies. Not only as an important reference, but for the beauty of the text.
When you read the ESV, NASB, NIV, etc., you are readying from the CRITICAL TEXT from Egypt, not the scriptures that flow from Antioch, FYI. You cannot say you have THE Bible when it disagrees with the KJV. Just compare KJV 1 Cor 1:18 with any modern version. You will see the HUGE difference.
Sweet
@@hanraddas9308 What makes the KJV right? Also why are you parroting the Antioch v Alexandrian nonsense? You do know that it was in Antioch where the deity of Christ was challenged, with the Arian heresy that Jesus was a created being. It was in Alexandria that the deity of Christ and the doctrine of the Trinity was defended. All we get from the KJV only cult, is the usual circular reasoning, and double standards
@@samlawrence2695 Here’s the problem- everyone is talking about what they like, or prefer. But nobody’s going to God, and asking him anything. So why are people so gullible? They are listening to someone who clearly the kjv existed before they were born, and stood strong then, and will exist when the worms are eating his rotter corpse. The fact that they do more than remove verses (which more than enough to stay away). They call Lucifer Jesus. Along with other damnable heresies. The nkjv also has a witchcraft symbol on it. I could type 30 paragraphs on these new perversions- but the people who can’t think for themselves, and are scared of a thou, and thus. It’s not waste my time. Idc anyway. It’s not my place to keep someone from reading a perverted version. But it’s also not theirs to steer me away from reading my real one. The one God approved, and that’s worked for 48 years of my life.
@@Proverbspsalmslol
I'm going to read the entire NIV. After wards, I will start with the KJV. God willing.
Please pray God gives me enough time in earth to read the entire Bible. Thank you.
Praying for you on this quest. You might enjoy David Pawson’s “Unlocking the Bible” series on UA-cam in which he teaches a lesson on each book specifically. He went home to be with the Lord in May 2020 at the age of 92.
Don't read that NIV or any new versions. They come from Alexandria Egypt and the new versions are really Catholic versions that use the Nestles text. It us corrupt. The NIV and other new versions have many, many bible verses missing and many changed verses. Read the King James bible. Also watch the video by Gail Riplinger, New Age Bible Versions. She exposes the errors in the new versions. Stick with the King James version, otherwise you will just get confused.
I used to read to the niv and I liked it until I found out how they misinterpret GOD's WORD and even took out HIS WORD which I clearly remembered HE warned to those never alter GOD's Word! But now I only read the King James Bible.
@@berean65 can you say the King James version is 100% correct? It's modern compared to the original. Could be many missing and changed verses in it also.
@@brass1951 No and it's not modern. The King James bible was out way before any new corrupted versions.
The KJV speaks to me, no other translation does.
Aaaaaaaaaaaaamen
SPEAKS TO YOU??? wow that is strange. What does it say?
@@Day12My lol
lol so it is better than the original haha
@@akiraasmr3002 I think these KJV only nuts think it's the original Bible. They are so brainwashed
I am not a KJV only guy.
But where I do stick to it specifically, is in regards to prophecy.....
Great video!
You don't have to look up every 5th old English word! You should be looking up every Greek or Hebrew word and seeing how it is used in multiple other verses. C'mon guys!!
I dont disagree with you in the main, but first, not old english at all. Its early modern english. Second, while i would never advise or confine the "average" english reading christian to the kjv, if you have grown up with the text you dont have issues like a lot of unexposed people do. And the wierder places are pretty rare and easily overcome. Yes over against ofr opposite, or prevent for before is confusing but once you understand the original meaning it isnt like you have to keep looking up words. But i do follow the complaint. My wife is totally befuddled by the kjvs language because she never grew up with it.
@@provokingthought9964 Has nothing to do with growing up with KJV or not. One factor is getting used to it which comes easily with interest. Another factor is if we have experienced spiritual transformation then we know the subject matter so well that it becomes easy for that reason also. For 300 years, until the early 1900s, the KJV was the one most widely used English document which stabilized the English language so that whatever the Scripture intends a word to mean became the standard definition of the word; we are much better off holding onto an awareness of English which is defined by Scripture rather than letting Scripture get dragged into the shifting sands of secular post modern English. When studying the ancient Greek vocab, and applying it to KJV English, we can continue that process of defining the English based on Scripture. There is one big problem that the KJV uses various words in translation in ways that are confusing, but modern and post modern translations have not improved on this so it's a moot point in this comparison.
When reading Scripture was a chore for me, it was difficult to tackle the KJV language style, but when it became a joy it became easy. We see this with pop-culture entertainment, people simply enjoy it and they easily memorize the deep detailed lore of whatever series they enjoy. The lore of Scripture is Spiritual Truth, not doctrinal conformity, and what is likely getting in people's way is when they are trying to conform to the doctrines of their denomination instead of enjoying the culture of Messiah's Spirituality.
@@provokingthought9964 you make no since but I digress
Most Hebrew and Greek has been corrupted, it takes time to study to find out which one's are tainted and which one's aren't, G.A. Riplinger has a few books on which one's are good, and which aren't, and why.......Plus, if God wanted us to read Hebrew or Greek, he would have had us born back then, imho, we should be reading, and led by the Holy Spirit first, and if we don't understand something, then look into that.
@@drtruthseeker8400 I don't believe most is corrupted. God is relevant in all times and all languages. To have to study Greek etc is an opportunity to BE led by the Holy Spirit. The struggle makes you look closer.
I hear this guy in my sleep because I am learning Greek from his teaching series lol. Love Dr. Plummer.
Guys, could you recommend me a dictionary that help me understand kjv bible?
Church Publications prints a little pamplet with the 500 archaic words in the KJB
You are not shouty and forceful thank you. I had lots of those people in my life when I was younger, so I left Christianity searching for the True God. Looking at some of the comments, I wouldn't dare to say more. I will try to look you up at the Seminary and you can answer my questions there, or not. Thank you. Gwen
Searching for true God??what the heck?? No body can search and find God...God has to reveal himself in the first place and it's God initiating and people receiving..may be God was after all speaking to you through those shouty and forceful people and you chose to ignore his leading looking at peoples behavior rather than the message.. nobody is perfect not even you ..so please stop your "God search " and just read the Bible and let God speak to you..and believe HIS words that IS the only thing that can give anybody eternal life...good luck...
I can’t WAIT to read the comments below. I have not peeked yet. But I can just imagine that it’s going to get VERY interesting.
My favorite comments are those who say or imply God spoke in King James English and that is good enough for me.
Hello. Could you please refer to material that speaks of the translation made by King James, specifically by including in chapter 8 of the Gospel of John, the section where Jesus exculpates the adulterous woman? I understand that that part does not exist in the original papyri and was a discretionality of the king. Thank you
Thank you for your exposition of your point of view. Excellent. We pray that God reveals what Greek sources are really the ones that followed lathe original inspiration.
Forgive us our trespasses as we forgive those who trespass against us. That's KJV. Some versions say forgive us our debts... This is a subtle yet very distinct difference. One asserts wrong doing or "trespasses." The other frames sin in terms of debt or "Mammon." Like paying a priest for forgiveness. Purchasing forgiveness. Clemency for money.
Robert White The KJV itself says “And forgive us our debts, as we forgive our debtors.” in Matthew 6:12.
my apolgies. i read trespasses in the bible i once had and it stuck in my mind as such. i thought it was kjv...it must have been one of those revisions
Robert White You’re good. I honestly thought he said trespasses in Luke’s account of the prayer, but he actually speaks of trespasses after the prayer in Matthew 6: 14-15.
Hello Brother, James Wright is the same as you are, How about New age versions by G.A. Riplinger.
Four Zulu Riplinger's book is excellent for people who does not have to read, or think, or spend a lot of time. She says those last words in a video with Kent Hovind. Watch it if you want.
KJO movement is moronic because believers basically attacks their own foundations of faith by despising ancient bible manuscripts. Believers attacks those bible manuscripts even more than skeptics. That's amazingly idiotic
@@estebanrogell9303 why is the KJV the most attacked? You don't find this suspicious?
Repent and believe in the Lord Jesus Christ
I don't see any book claiming that the KJV is a demonic version...
@@estebanrogell9303 who said demonic? I said attacked
Repent and believe in the Lord Jesus Christ
I know... isn't weird that "the most attacked version" is not called a "demonic version"? Don't you think that calling a bible version a demonic version, like Ripplinger does, is a serious attack? Come on, the new bible versions are way more attacked, even by believers, than the KJV
I’ve never been a “my way is more right than yours” type of person when it comes to Christianity. What you honestly feel in your heart in relationship to Christ is all that matters to me.
Are you Mormon?
*_was it morphed by his usage_* *_Translating the King James Bible._*
“Language changes over time” Me (looks around 2021) “oh brother, there’s a huge understatement “ 😂
dId YoU jUsT aSsUmE tHeIr GeNdEr?!
/s
@@Razaiel no idea 😂 that was so 4 weeks ago…
@Andrew Ervin you know you could just be kind and respect what people want to be called by.
@@m_disulphide I may choose to indulge another person's delusions depending on the situation.
@@Razaiel Why not see it as a perfectly fine mode of being? A binary is much too strict for all the incredible variety of people on this earth.
Very well said. Heard both sides of the argument, this is beauty in simplicity.
Over 30 years ago i had a KJV and NIV. To this day i still read and study from the two Holy Scripture books. I can't get into those other translation books. Oh yeah, back then they had the concordance to help you break down those difficult words. Those three books for me, made for a better study time; Sitting at the feet of Jesus!!!
The NIV is corrupt.
@@doriansmith5667. It takes the Holy Spirit to help you interpret the scriptures! Sometimes the NIV makes for a better understanding of a difficult verse of scripture!
@@darrellbarnes1171 jehovas witness bible?
They belive Jesus is an angel and deny the Holy Spirit power.
@@doriansmith5667. I'm not a Jehovah Witness. I'm a child of the Most High God! And the only two Holy Scriptures i use are the KJV & NIV. I rely on the Holy Spirit for understanding of the Holy Scriptures!
You can't challenge me when it comes to the Holy Scriptures... I been studying the Word of God for over 30 yrs now!
Oh yeah. Jehovah's Witness study out of the New World Translation Bible, not the NIV!
I enjoyed this episode (my first), but was looking more for how the KJV stacks up to older Bibles (Catholic, for example). I grew up Catholic and have a friend who is KJV only. While I do have the KJV Bible, I'm interested in knowing whether there are older Catholic Bibles that I can look into. I thought I might look into the Douay Bible, but now I have to research what the Latin Vulgate is. Do you have any videos comparing KJV to older Catholic Bibles?
All other versions are "Catholic" Bibles.
The KJV is the only one the Vatican still won't approve.
That alone tells me it is the correct one.
@@my1viceis it the only one NOT with a copy right also?
What does the Westminster Large Confession say about the AV?
I currently have the NKJV and all I can say is that I received a call from my family that my uncle was dying. He had cancer and a collapsed lung. Also coughed up blood. At first the hospital was only admitting 2 visitors at a time and eventually approved 3. Soon after we were all called in because he was about to pass. 6 breathes per minute and eyes rolled back. My cousin said, “this is what god wants.” My cousins are not believers. I’m the only Christian in the family. While holding my NKJV I said, “Father, please forgive us of our sins.” After that I read 2 Samuel 7:28 and Romans 16:20 and said Amen. Not long after my uncle started recovering and no longer required intensive care. The lords word does not return to him void. This power is in Exodus 19:5. Believe and you shall receive!!!!!!
Careful! Some of the kjv onlyists here will claim Satan healed him because you used the "wrong" bible! Great thing you did btw!
@@Nick-wn1xw I believe you brother Nick but I am not bothered if they say it was Satan. The Bible says that those that deny the father and the son is the Antichrist. I am all for Jesus!!!!
@@Nick-wn1xw 👏😂👏boy, there are some psycho KJV only fanatics huh! I've come to find out. 😮
I love this what a great consideration, and presentation of information. Thank you for starting this conversation.
And your manners in being lied to are such a cherished sight. Such beauty in the art of deception.
Hope you who are truly searching the matter out read this comment:
This guy to me personally is ignorant at best or disgustingly biased at worst because he failed to mention that although current dating methods dont show "older" manuscripts with this verse. Church fathers have however in their own personal journals have quoted this verse. Proving without a doubt it was in the orginal.
*Cyprian writes around A.D. 250, ‘The Lord says “I and the Father are one' and likewise it is written of the Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit, 'And these three are one”.’* [The Ante-Nicene Fathers: Translations of the Writings of the Church Fathers Down to A.D. 325
@@jbcfamily4802 Always some deception,omissions,contradictions with these fellows.If u just do a modicum of research.It's quite obvious who's telling the truth.The more research the more obvious.
When ever I read the Bible, I often ask God what He meant when He wrote this or that. Helps a lots. It makes the Bible come alive.
My dad reads the KJV. I used to read the NIV. It was interesting to see how the translations differed on certain passages. I ended moving to the NKJV which is a more literal translation than NIV, but still very readable.
The difference between NIV and NKJV, aside from being "thought for thought" and "word for word" is that the NIV is eclectic while the NKJV used the Textus Receptus.
Hmmm eclectic. ? Never thought about it like that.
@@jeffcarlson3269
*Textual criticism* is a method used to determine what the original manuscripts of the Bible said. The original manuscripts of the Bible are either lost, hidden, or no longer in existence. What we do have is tens of thousands of copies of the original manuscripts dating from the 1st to the 15th centuries A.D.
There are three primary methods to textual criticism. The first is the *Textus Receptus.* The Textus Receptus was a manuscript of the Bible that was compiled by a man named Erasmus in the 1500s A.D. He took the limited number of manuscripts he had access to and compiled them into what eventually became known as the Textus Receptus. The Textus Receptus is the textual basis behind the King James Version and New King James Version.
A second method is known as the *Majority Text.* The Majority Text takes all of the manuscripts that are available today, compares the differences, and chooses the most likely correct reading based on which reading occurs the most. For example, if 748 manuscripts read "he said" and 1,429 manuscripts read "they said" the Majority Text will go with "they said" as the most likely original reading. There are no major Bible translations that are based on the Majority Text.
The third method is known as the *critical or eclectic method.* The eclectic method involves considering external and internal evidences for determining the most likely original text. External evidence makes us ask these questions: in how many manuscripts does the reading occur? what are the dates for these manuscripts? in what region of the world were these manuscripts found? Internal evidence prompts these questions: what could have caused these varying readings? which reading can possibly explain the origin of the other readings? The New International Version, New American Standard, New Living Translation, and most other Bible translations use the Eclectic Text.
@@JesseMgala Thanks, that was really helpful. It appears you are in favour of the eclectic text. I believe new American standard is more word for word, whereas NIV is more thought for thought. Even though they are bases on the same method.
My iPad Bible (olive tree) has multiple versions. I’ll keep an eye on the NASV.
I favour the literal translations because I like to work out the meaning of what the author meant on my own. The NKJV has a built in strongs reference which helps.
@@sharpsbattle I've read the 1984 NIV 5 or 6 times If I remember correctly, before that the KJV 2 times. I just started reading NKJV in Genesis, while I'm in Romans of the NASB.
For Bible study word for word is better.
Great information and video. I appreciate your humility and approach. It is amazing to me how the KJV only arguments get such a hold on people. It is very difficult to change their minds even with the good points (facts) you presented.
I like the NLT and I used to be a NIV guy because that’s what my church used. I found that the NIV translation has inaccuracies that confused me more and NLT gave me the ability to understand more in depth along with using an app like the Bible hub that provided original Hebrew and Greek text along with commentaries about hard to understand scripture. What I have realized is that some Christian doctrine became man made rules vs Gods design. This led me to be more open minded about reading vs taking everything literally and understanding historical and cultural context I may perceive were not that same cultural context that the people writing the text in their present day perceived. The one thing that is correct in any Bible is the name of Jesus which means God Saves and the story from beginning to end of him revealing that mystery to us which we now know that we are saved by his grace alone (which produces faith) because he chose to be faithful to us.
*_was it morphed by his usage_* *_Translating the King James Bible._*
I don’t truly understand word thought of the KJV, so I read NIV and NLT…but I always refer NKJV to ensure accuracy for complete understanding. To each their own as long as God gets the glory. 🙏🏽
The NIV says Jesus fell from heaven . The NIV is the worse version it’s basically the Bible for Catholics and as a I repented Catholic I beseech you to do your research on NIV the ESV is decent while it’s not the KJV it as easy to read as the NIV even easier in my opinion but NIV is not good
@@amandainchrist2908 I did do my research, which is why I gave my opinion on the varying transitions. Each person has their own path to God. Again, as long as El Elyon gets the glory. 🙏🏽
@@amandainchrist2908 In Christ don’t turn ppl away from reading scripture. The Bible was written in a completely different language, so do know many words in ALL translations can and are misunderstood. Just be careful because if I hadn’t had my own experience with God’s miracles I would have been deterred from further exploring because you told me a particular translation isn’t correct. As long as I’m following Christ I’m on the path God made for me. Sometimes believers are quick to correct others instead of just observing. You don’t have to correct everyone. Just pray 🙏🏽
@@El_Roi75 there is only path to God and that is Jesus Christ his son .
@@amandainchrist2908 NIV is no more incorrect than your comment.
10:58 oh really?
I wonder what translation is easier to understand here 🤔
Job 6:6 (KJV)
Can that which is unsavoury be eaten without salt? or is there any taste in the white of an egg?
Job 6:6: (ESV)
Can that which is tasteless be eaten without salt, or is there any taste in the juice of the mallow?
I do believe that some translations (not all) does change the meaning of certain passages of scripture. However, I am not bent on just referring to the 1611 English version. The other considerations to take is the fact that certain old English translations did not have words in the English language that exist today. (i.e. homosexality/ homosexual) was not in the English language at the time that the original English translation was pinned, but it is in more modern English translations today. That being said, I agree with what is being pointed out in this post.
Praise God for the truth and the light shining through!! Love that you did a video on this. I press on everyday trying to seek the Lord in everything trying to be lead by the Holy Spirit and not by false teachings. Keep up the great work. Just started watching a lot of your videos🙏😇
Yup you better go do a bunch of work now. Quit that job so you can be saved by searching your whole life. What kind of sick God wants that? Come on man do you realize the Bible has 4 different distinctive time periods in it and there are scriptures that apply to only certain groups? Jews/Gentiles(Church)/Revelations/Reign of Jews for 1000 years after New Jerusalem is created
Revelation 20:4-6
King James Version
4 And I saw thrones, and they sat upon them, and judgment was given unto them: and I saw the souls of them that were beheaded for the witness of Jesus, and for the word of God, and which had not worshipped the beast, neither his image, neither had received his mark upon their foreheads, or in their hands; and they lived and reigned with Christ a thousand years.
5 But the rest of the dead lived not again until the thousand years were finished. This is the first resurrection.
6 Blessed and holy is he that hath part in the first resurrection: on such the second death hath no power, but they shall be priests of God and of Christ, and shall reign with him a thousand years. (Has this happened yet?)
No. So if the first Testament is all the Jews go by yet they always dabble in reading from the new Testament to disprove Christ (Or say he is Lucifer) why do that if they have so much trust in their God. Why even bother believing in such theories if it isn't even real to them? Every person I know that is a Jew lives a pretty sinful life just sayin. So are they excused? Who saves them? God just created us to slaughter and deceive us? No That is wrong sorry
*_was it morphed by his usage_* *_Translating the King James Bible._*
Yay! I have been waiting for this video to come out! Such a complicated issue.
Revelation 22:18 For I testify unto every man that heareth the words of the prophecy of this book, If any man shall add unto this things, God shall add unto him the plaques that are written in this book: 19 And if any man shall take away from the words of the book of this prophecy, God shall take away his part out of the book of life, and out of the holy city, and from the things which are written in this book. 20 He which testifieth these things saith, Surely I come quickly. Amen. Even so, come, Lord Jesus. 21 The grace of our Lord Jesus Christ be with you all. Amen. KJV
Amen, but this does not force us to claim only one tranlsation is correct. Otherewise you better get to college and start learning greek and hebrew
KJV, 1 Corinthians 2:1-16, God's Wisdom and His Holy Ghost upon you is the key to understand His word.
Christ is the Power of God and the Wisdom of God [1st Corinthians 1;24].❤
Translation and version are 2 different things! You can have 1 version for a various translation.
So which VERSION of bible is the truth? Not the translation!
Would I hand someone a dictionary and expect them to look up every 5th word? A professor telling someone not to do research! May it never be! Too many translations (notice I said too many; they can be helpful) is a cause for confusion. Don't understand something? Research it and let the Holy Spirit bring clarity, John 16:12-15.
@@allagatoral3839 what?
@@allagatoral3839 you do know most of the self proclaimed Christians aren’t saved tho, so that % isn’t a real true fact
@@allagatoral3839 I don’t rly identify wit religion I focus on the word but I get watchu saying
I love my 1560 GENEVA Bible facsimile! The Old English is challenging but fun to read!
This is a great video. My issue with modern Bibles has to do with American copyright laws. New Bibles must have a certain number of word choice differences to be copywritten. One messianic version ( I think the scriptures) changed glory to esteem. There is a chasm of difference between those two words. I feel safest reading my nkjv
I recommend the ESV. In my experience, it's been more accurate with certain words that could mean separate things. But of course, just be open minded to all the possibilities.
I recommend the CSB. It is extremely accurate to the original text but also very easy to read. The ESV is also a great version but not as easy to read as the NIV or CSB
And you are fine with the 300 times it lessens the deity of Jesus?
Amazing.
thank you so much for the introduction acknowledging why the KJV is so beloved. people too often bash on the KJV without regarding 400 years worth of tradition.
A is for America : and there lies the problem, tradition!
@ LIAR! It is traditions of MEN that are to be shunned, Washing of hands etc. These rudiments are after men.
But good godly tradition is needed, and commanded. 1 Thess 3 :6,
I'm a Protestant just so you all know. I'm not talking about false teachings of works righteousness that Paul talked about. I'm talking about cherishing what came in the church before us. Drives me crazy how people have to throw away any sort of tradition just because it's "old fashioned" or their vocabulary is too shallow to comprehend the KJV. People seek out Christ in the most menial ways. Paul told us to work out our salvation with fear and trembling. "Work out" as in use it for all it's worth. Study deep in The Word. Study the history of the church. Sing old hymns that you people probably think are boring. Outside of working in salvation, how about we Appreciate traditional architecture instead of an aluminum building with a coffee bar inside to attract all the hollow millennials. Appreciate the Holy house of God and not a trendy coffee bar with Lazer lights, smoke machines, and pretentious singers.
This brother have the gift of teaching. I look for more narration from him. God bless you brother
Of teaching lies.
Remember, the greatest TEACHER of all is the LORD HIMSELF.
If you ever have doubts, go unto the BOOK of books.
Satan knows all too well, the bible always telling the truth and he's constantly finding new ways to mislead people. He is seeking whom he may devour. Please beware, brethren.
@@a.d.marshall2748 What lies? Because he rejects the KJV only heresy?
The 1 John 5:7 thing is eye opening. They clearly were attempting to add the trinity doctrine knowing that it doesn't exist in scripture.
Great presentation. Thank you.
Colossians 2:8 Beware lest any man spoil you through philosophy and vain deceit, after the tradition of men, after the rudiments of the world, and not after Christ.
Do you have point relating to this video or just like spouting random quotes?
It's a great way of presenting your point of view...Really enjoyed your presentation the first time. However, after my previous comment, I decided to do more research, and After doing more research and listening to different theologians, experts on this matter --- to me, it seems like the Textus Receptus is the Greek compilation that's is closer to the original autographs. For example, the earliest translations of Greek to other languages of the region, match the Textus Receptus and not the Critical Text. In addition that the majority of the Pre Nicene fathers of the church, also cited the Byzantine text, the basis of the Textus Receptus. The lack of abundance of same, on the Critical Text side, makes it "look" as if it was text that was corrupted, after the 1st Council of Nicaea. In English, I believe only the KJV, is using the TR as the Greek source.
Personally, I stick to the word for word translations. I’m not really sure that I trust the thought for thought translations. I love the KJV and grew up with it, but have also come to really like and even prefer the NASB and the ESV.
FYI, *no* translations are word for word.
@@mookyss it is common parlance for formal equivalence translations. Also there are several actual word-for-word interlinear translations.
A young woman named Mary vs a virgin named Mary, Is very misleading.
Almah of Isaiah 7 means young woman. Parthenos of Matthew 1 means virgin. LXX (greek translation of old testament) translated Almah as Parthenos. Matthew followed the LXX. The NRSV and other follows this more literal rendering, having young woman in isaiah and virgin in matthew. But ESV and others make it virgin in both places. Good reasons for the LXX translating it as virgin. Makes good sense fir us to maintain that. But nothing weird or conspiratorial or misleading about the textual divergence. LXX often departed from the hebrew. Note Hebrews 10.5 "a body thou hast prepared me". Try to find that old testament quote in the old testament. Youll be searching a while.
No it’s not! It all depends how u read it. We don’t care if she’s a virgin or not. They didn’t want to add virgin because it may mislead ppl thinking she was a virgin as a holly virgin and not virgin with no man if u understand what I’m saying. Bottom line is that virgin or not virgin meaning never had a man it doesn’t matter . We are here to know only about God n what he wants us to do in earth .
Well, there’s more verses in the Bible that tells us Mary was a virgin though, wasn’t there? I don’t need anyone to tell me she was a virgin, when they speak of immaculate conception, you know she’s a virgin.
@@NaomiCastro-Neo Whether Jesus was born of a virgin makes all the difference in the world. Doing good on Earth will do nothing to save you. Only the perfect sinless blood of Jesus can reconcile us to God.
What news is it that a young woman gives birth?🤔 Now, a virgin giving birth is an eye opener!
The thou/you distinction is important to appreciate the original intention.
Thou is just the informal you.
@@simonpedersen9940 Exactly. Formality matters because it implies the relationship between speaker and listener.
@@simonpedersen9940 No, you is plural, thou is singular. A lot of modern bibles will have footnotes saying something like "gk you is plural". Not the biggest del in the world, but it is a nice feature of some older translations.
Every new translation I've studied didn't just update the words or make it easier to read, but they changed sentences, adding or subtracting that changed doctrine.
I read the King James Bible first, and I love it. However, I couldn't agree with you more. in fact I use many translations when i teach my Bible study group.
Hello how’re you doing over there ?
That's because you may not have the Holy Spirit teaching you
@@nathanhyland8671Has the Holy Spirit led you to a KJV approach ?
I once heard someone say that the best translation of the bible is the one you read faithfully. I tend to agree. I personally prefer the ESV and NLT depending on my purpose. ESV is much better for really digging into the text itself and the NLT is just a really easy reading bible. I've tried to read the KJV many times, but the language is really hard for me. I understand it may not be hard for you. Some things that may be hard for you are easy for me and vice versa. For me, trying to read the KJV is almost like trying to read a foreign language.
What do you think it is that God prefers?
@@maverickmovies1414 the following link is to a book that gives detail on how much of the rheims new testament went into the kjv :
books.google.com/books/about/The_Part_of_Rheims_in_the_Making_of_the.html?id=xgwXAAAAYAAJ&printsec=frontcover&source=kp_read_button
That sentence "God was manifest in the flesh" is saying so clearly that Jesus is God.
Simply, yes, every person, at least once in a lifetime, do a pilgrimage, read the King James Version in all it archaic language, from cover to cover. God Almighty will reveal himself therein, even in midst of human errors.
The AV 1611 is without any proven error.
The kjv is written based on the 3rd edition of the textus receptus which was also modified by Stephanus in 1550 (I believe). St Jerome wrote the Latin vulgate and the geneva was written by some reformer scholars. All of which were used to write the kjv.
did Cyprian not quote it word for word in 250ad? And Tertullian?
Interesting that one of these three existing older manuscripts he mentions as being more reliable and from before 1400 (sanaiticus) removed the resurrection of Christ and the ascension of Christ, leading to doctrines such as 'Jesus was just a man and not God '... And wasn't it missing 1/4 of the Old Testament? Further study is certainly needed...
Sinaiticus is from the 350's AD, and even if it has some of the Greek OT (Septuagint) there are hundreds of other ancient copies of the Septuagint). It does give us one of the earliest full GNT manuscripts. I recommend F. F. Bruce book, "The New Testament Documents: Are they Reliable?" from 1943, 1st ed.
I don't need a specific version to tell me Jesus was the Son of Man and the Son of God, and died for my sins! God has proven me and performed miracles in my life saving me from death three times, and allowing me to save someones life. It is my Father in Heaven who has blessed me, and it is Jesus Son of God, who died for my sins! If any version of the Bible says different that is a false doctrine from Satan, and the author is burning in hell for leading the flock astray!
The Truth will set you free in Jesus name, for he is the Truth, the Way, for he is I AM!
Its weird how people keep on saying verses were removed in the newer versions, but nobody bothered to ask whether they were even present in the oldest versions
Bingo
Nonsense!
Exactly but that is the hypocritical KJV only cult for you. Full of double standards and deceptions, modern day Pharisees
Because the Word of God was passed down through generations and now they are digging up old trash and claiming it to be the word of God but why would the word of God be hidden underground for centuries? Don't you think it would have been passed down?
I wish to learn more. Do you have a school or something? I am hungry.
I was looking for information about this. A bunch of people were mad at me for reading the rsv so I decided to do a bit of research
If you are reading the Bible and loving it, you are doing well, whatever the version.. keep it up and ignore the mad bunch
@@michaelnewzealand1888Thank you!
This was very helpful! Well explained, thank you 🙏🏽
Doc, in as much as I'm tempted to believe all your explanations, there's no single scripture you've used to support your argument.
Well, you did ask "did Paul, et al write these?"... Gen 3:1-3.
I'll advice you prove your points with scripture, and not just the words of men.
Let God be true, but every man a liar.
Wow, beautifully and wonderfully said brother, great information and presented so nicely.
Was raised up on the KJV but now I read many different Translations and stay close to the NASB 1995 version. I also love the Amplified Bible from time to time. Anything but the NIV.
Ya, the NIV is terrible.
Thank you for having the courage to make this video. One does not disrespect the King Janes Version, or its incredible influence on the English language or Christendom in the English speaking world, by noting that several modern English translations are trustworthy and can be used with confidence. It seems so absurd that fellow Christians would be so opposed to reading God’s Word in a form of the English language that can actually by understood by someone in the 21st century.
If you can't understand the KJV blame your education system. It's literally at a 4th or 5th grade reading level. It used to be the standard by which the alphabet and such was taught in the English speaking world. Society has gotten dumber over time. On purpose I do believe so they can be better controlled and manipulated on what to think and believe. Notice a lot of school systems today teach WHAT to think instead of HOW. Critical thinking skills and an extended vernacular have gone out with window in favor of monkey see monkey do and slang.
@@proverbs31woman51 I agree the KJV is far more understandable than people act like, but we have more accurate translations available today. While the KJV is a masterpiece of literature that every Christian should respect the NASB95, ESV, LSB, or even the NKJV are generally better translations for Christians today.
Agree, I used to find it hard but as my wife and I got closer to Jesus and God and through the precious Holy Spirit it's became easier to read. Holy Spirit will even point out what I get wrong.
good point, especially when some people today are only semi literate. It is hard enough to read a modern translation. I have sat through butchered readings of the KJV by semi illiterate friends who were told by highly educated brothers they must read that version. What a shame. Good for the highly educated who have been long term Christians to read but not for others necessarily
This is a great way to discuss this topic. Thank you, Dr. Plummer.
I answered and said, "If I have found favor in thy sight, O Lord, show this also to thy servant: whether after death, as soon as every one of us yields up his soul, we shall be kept in rest until those times come when thou wilt renew the creation, or whether we shall be tormented at once?" 76 He answered me and said, "I will show you that also, but do not be associated with those who have shown scorn, nor number yourself among those who are tormented. 77 For you have a treasure of works laid up with the Most High; but it will not be shown to you until the last times.
78 Now, concerning death, the teaching is: When the decisive decree has gone forth from the Most High that a man shall die, as the spirit leaves the body to return again to him who gave it, first of all it adores the glory of the Most High. 79 And if it is one of those who have shown scorn and have not kept the way of the Most High, and who have despised his law, and who have hated those who fear the Most High -- 80 such spirits shall not enter into habitations, but shall immediately wander about in torments, ever grieving and sad, in seven ways.
81 The first way, because they have scorned the law of the Most High. 82 The second way, because they cannot now make a good repentance that they may live. 83 The third way, they shall see the reward laid up for those who have trusted the covenants of the Most High. 84 The fourth way, they shall consider the torment laid up for themselves in the last days. 85 The fifth way, they shall see how the habitations of the others are guarded by angels in profound quiet. 86 The sixth way, they shall see how some of them will pass over into torments. 87 The seventh way, which is worse than all the ways that have been mentioned, because they shall utterly waste away in confusion and be consumed with shame, and shall wither with fear at seeing the glory of the Most High before whom they sinned while they were alive, and before whom they are to be judged in the last times.
88 "Now this is the order of those who have kept the ways of the Most High, when they shall be separated from their mortal body. 89 During the time that they lived in it, they laboriously served the Most High, and withstood danger every hour, that they might keep the law of the Lawgiver perfectly. 90 Therefore this is the teaching concerning them: 91 First of all, they shall see with great joy the glory of him who receives them, for they shall have rest in seven orders.
92 The first order, because they have striven with great effort to overcome the evil thought which was formed with them, that it might not lead them astray from life into death. 93 The second order, because they see the perplexity in which the souls of the unrighteous wander, and the punishment that awaits them. 94 The third order, they see the witness which he who formed them bears concerning them, that while they were alive they kept the law which was given them in trust. 95 The fourth order, they understand the rest which they now enjoy, being gathered into their chambers and guarded by angels in profound quiet, and the glory which awaits them in the last days. 96 The fifth order, they rejoice that they have now escaped what is corruptible, and shall inherit what is to come;
and besides they see the straits and toil from which they have been delivered, and the spacious liberty which they are to receive and enjoy in immortality. 97 The sixth order, when it is shown to them how their face is to shine like the sun, and how they are to be made like the light of the stars, being incorruptible from then on. 98 The seventh order, which is greater than all that have been mentioned, because they shall rejoice with boldness, and shall be confident without confusion, and shall be glad without fear, for they hasten to behold the face of him whom they served in life and from whom they are to receive their reward when glorified.
99 This is the order of the souls of the righteous, as henceforth is announced; and the aforesaid are the ways of torment which those who would not give heed shall suffer hereafter." 100 I answered and said, "Will time therefore be given to the souls, after they have been separated from the bodies, to see what you have described to me?" 101 He said to me, "They shall have freedom for seven days, so that during these seven days they may see the things of which you have been told, and afterwards they shall be gathered in their habitations."
102 I answered and said, "If I have found favor in thy sight, show further to me, thy servant, whether on the day of judgment the righteous will be able to intercede for the unrighteous or to entreat the Most High for them, 103 fathers for sons or sons for parents, brothers for brothers, relatives for their kinsmen, or friends for those who are most dear." 104 He answered me and said, "Since you have found favor in my sight, I will show you this also. The day of judgment is decisive and displays to all the seal of truth. Just as now a father does not send his son, or a son his father, or a master his servant, or a friend his dearest friend, to be ill or sleep or eat or be healed in his stead, 105 so no one shall ever pray for another on that day, neither shall any one lay a burden on another; for then every one shall bear his own righteousness and unrighteousness." 2 Esdras 7:75
the Most High can override any problem, when you recoginze the problem, and sin to turn your back on sin and give your life to the Most High, for even the most healthiest person on earth is but vapor and like a flower that fades away eventually, the earth as a baby cradle is for us to reach spiritual growth before we leave this earth, so that you don't die prematurely , most importantly to acknowledge his beloved Son whom sent to write off the debt of sins, starting a new covenant,
Hebrews 10:26
26For if we sin willfully after we have received the knowledge of the truth, there no longer remains a sacrifice for sins, 27but a certain fearful expectation of judgment, and fiery indignation which will devour the adversaries. 28Anyone who has rejected Moses’ law dies without mercy on the testimony of two or three witnesses. 29Of how much worse punishment, do you suppose, will he be thought worthy who has trampled the Son of God underfoot, counted the blood of the covenant by which he was sanctified a common thing, and insulted the Spirit of grace? 30For we know Him who said, “Vengeance is Mine, I will repay,” says the Most High. And again, “The MOst High will judge His people.” 31It is a fearful thing to fall into the hands of the living Most High.
/////////////////////,,,,,,
I'm reading The New World Translation Bible of Jehovah's witnesses it is the same as the NIV translates. So, is it bad to read or not. They are the same as I think as I read it.
@Daren Fliflet I'm using now King James Version. Even though it's not my own tongues. I will do my best to understand what God said in the english Language ❤️.
Thank you
NKJV and KJV are the most beautiful and poetic. They are my go to. I also love the historical value as millions around the world are reading them and learning the verses. I realized that all the Bible Quotes i remember from my childhood are KJV. I also use NLT and Amplified for reference, paraphrase and to get a more modern perspective on the meaning but the missing verses in the more “modern” translations is concerning. I love your idea of preserving and referencing them all. We need to keep preserving the older texts so we don’t miss anything and as more and more modern translations seek to update the text.
Amplified Classic to 1987 is better than the subsequent Amplified.
@@kingston163 Here’s the problem- everyone is talking about what they like, or prefer. But nobody’s going to God, and asking him anything. So why are people so gullible? They are listening to someone who clearly the kjv existed before they were born, and stood strong then, and will exist when the worms are eating his rotted corpse. The fact that they do more than remove verses (which more than enough to stay away). They call Lucifer Jesus. Along with other damnable heresies. The nkjv also has a witchcraft symbol on it. I could type 30 paragraphs on these new perversions- but the people who can’t think for themselves, and are scared of a thou, and thus. It’s not waste my time. Idc anyway. It’s not my place to keep someone from reading a perverted version. But it’s also not theirs to steer me away from reading my real one. The one God approved, and that’s worked for 49 years of my life.
@Proverbspsalms Amen brother!
@@pbmc_ amen! This is foolishness
@@Proverbspsalms I ve never even opened ,held another version. I m a kjv onliest to the fullest👊.
2 Timothy 3:16
“All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness:”
Even the New World Translation (the Jehovah's Witnesses Bible)?
Of course, all original Greek and Hebrew scripture is good. But what about a the 4th complete English translation of that scripture? Is that perfect? Is that as good as the original Greek/Hebrew?
Of course it isn't. You're going to have to use the brain God gave you. You're going to have to study.
@WakeU.S. fromSlumberCensored, so what happens when we discover what words actually mean? For instance, every Bible translates Τετέλεσται as "it is finished". When this was translated, there was only one example of this word in all of Greek, and this was it. No one knew for sure what it meant.
But now, we have many, many examples of this word. We now know without a doubt that this word means "paid in full". Shouldn't a new translation be made that more clearly expresses Jesus' last word before His death?
This is only one example. There are many examples.
God's word is preserved..., in the Hebrew and the Greek. Even the translators of the KJV admitted that a perfect translation is impossible. They admitted the the KJV was not perfect. They said that newer translations would most likely be more accurate. Why do you think you are right, when they said you are wrong?
@WakeU.S. fromSlumberCensored , Why don't they ever keep reading? You were in the correct section of the preface, but you didn't get to the the good part. They talk about the Kings speech is still the Kings speech if you translate it I to French or bunch of other long winded languages. Then they long windedly say
No cause therefore why the word translated should be denied to be the word, or forbidden to be current, notwithstanding that some imperfections and blemishes may be noted in the setting forth of it. For whatever was perfect under the Sun, where Apostles or Apostolic men, that is, men endued with an extraordinary measure of God's spirit, and privileged with the privilege of infallibility, had not their hand?
Weird how they say it might be imperfect and have blemishes, but you say that's impossible.
@WakeU.S. fromSlumberCensored, Am I the one that doesn't understand? Did you get the entire point of that section? They explain that translations can never be perfect, because they are translations.
Is it the Word of God? Yes. And I agree with them on that. Can it be improved on? Of course. 1611 English is a dead language. Can the meaning be even more clear to a modern reader? Absolutely! Such as the example I gave (with your half hearted refutation that still came to the odd conclusion that I was right).
You are modern day Judaizers. You've placed an unnecessary roadblock in front of baby Christians. You've place a roadblock in front of those we wish to convert. Many souls will lost because of this movement.
I have no issue with you studying the KJV. My issue is when you lie about it being the only valid translation. That's demonic. If anything was a demonic Jesuit plot, it would be that.
@WakeU.S. fromSlumberCensored, I'm sorry you spent all that time writing all that. I have no intention of reading it. You can't take an honest rebuke. Even Paul, the humble person you keep talking about, rebuked Peter when he sided with the Judaizers. You remember them? The ancient equivalent if the KJV only crowd. Nothing about that is ad hominem.
Will you use a tactic that isn't information dump.
Is the Word of God perfect, complete, and inerrant? And if so, what guidelines should be used to decide which versions are perfect, complete and inerrant? Surely not all versions, correct? If a new believer came to you and asked whether his version was okay, what would you look for to be able to answer that question?
Like when people mock & make fun of Christian's for unicorns being in the Bible. If they investigated, a unicorn is a one horned rhinoceros. The unicorn horse they mock us with wasn't invented until the 1800's.
I agree! Studying the bible is not just about it's version but the entire thought as a whole. Very important to understand the "Sola-Scriptura" method.
Through the Holy Spirit's guidance ☺️
No one who claims Sola scriptura actually practices it but all of them are antichrist baby baptising Bibld correctors. Hypocrites all.
Not if they have removed it.
Really impressed with your position on the integrity of the scriptures accuracy and a proper view of biblical translation. thank you for a clear and understandable presentation on a topic that can get rather scholarly very quickly. I would be interested in your perspective on a video you may already be familiar with by NathanH83 "We're the pyramids built before the flood?" if you would want to check it out. Either way thank you for an interesting video.
Just for laughs. My dad's generation. "I use a King James Bible, my daddy used a King James Bible and his daddy used a King James Bible, so why on earth would I use anything else". My grandsons generation. "I use an NIV Bible, my daddy used and NIV Bible and his daddy used an NIV Bible so why on earth would I use anything else". Smart alec kids........ hate it when they do that