KJV Translators Were Experts In Hebrew, Greek, And Latin
Вставка
- Опубліковано 20 тра 2024
- Pastor Steve Waldron, New Life of Albany - Albany, Ga
Yes, totally. Thanks for watching! Please subscribe and share! To contribute to New Life, please click the link below and press donate. Please check out our podcast link below. God bless!
newlifeofalbany.com/ | anchor.fm/steve-waldron
Also, please be aware that any comments over 2-3 sentences will be deleted at the moderator's discretion. Thank you for your understanding on this matter!
Yes! These men were phenomenal! Thank you for sharing! -Donnie
No doubt!
Amos 3:3 "Can two walk together, except they be agreed?"
I agree with you Pastor Waldron, the KJV is an excellent translation.
Theses men had the hand of GOD on them. They did not realize the profound work they were doing
Well said preacher..
They were, however, they used the Textus Receptus which was compiled by Beza and Erasmus. The work of Erasmus was itself somewhat sloppy and done in haste and was criticized as the time for its many errors. Erasmus used Byzantine manuscripts, which could be traced back to the work of Lucian, who himself made many changes to the text.
I’ve done, and have many more videos, showing the incorrectness of your statements. Common misconceptions.
@@NewLifeOfAlbanyGa Don't get me wrong. The KJV is a beautiful translation and should be read because of the masterful translation into English. But other translations should be read as well. Really, every translation has some strengths and weaknesses.
@@DavidVonR Why should other translations be read as well? They are far removed from TR English translations, and purported strengths and weaknesses are the baseless opinions starting with the revisers of 1881 that are Polly parroted today. KJV extremely accurate above all.
@@brianhaley4471 Because they use earlier manuscripts that were better preserved. The scribes that produced the Alexandrian text-type made fewer errors and the climate of Egypt was quite dry, which allowed codices and papyri to be preserved.
@@DavidVonR They are presumed older, and legitimate? But evidence shows they are a fraudulent, corrupt works. Plus evidence that shows that the TR/Majority Text/Byzantine type text are the only true manuscripts. If you are a “Berean”, and want to know the truth let me know? Because it’s quite a bit to type in.
If they were experts then why did they mistranslate Acts 12:4?
I’ve got videos on that…
If are meaning Easter, because there some obscure references to being tied to paganism? But the true etymology of the word, comes from the German- east, and the Latin-dawn. So the literal meaning of the word Easter: east rising, the dawn, new day dawning, the sun rising. Since Passover was completed Saturday night, as Jesus was the last Passover, dying once for all( for whosoever will). The KJB Bible scholars understand this, and the true meaning of Easter. As Jesus arose from the grave on Sunday morning, Easter matches exactly what took place. This is why it is Easter was chosen to describe the Resurrection event, as the best possible way to describe it. So Easter is perfectly fine!
@@claytonsmith6148 Did you watch the video series or just freestyling?
@@NewLifeOfAlbanyGa Yes I watched this video, there are some of your older videos that I may have missed, or need to rewatch again. But I was just responding to the other comment. I really appreciate your heart, and the information that you put out.
@@claytonsmith6148 obscure? That’s funny. You have to be honest and ask yourself what does a rabbit that magically lays eggs have to do with JESUS rising from the dead. The verse in Acts 12:4 is translated as Passover, the end. The scripture tells us in Exodus 23:13 not to even speak the names of other gods. Scripture also tells us in 1 Thessalonians 5:22 to shun all appearances of evil. Make no mistake about it, your defending using the name of a pagan fertility goddess.
You left out Mauro Biglino. He seems to be comin up with lots that were missed. Maybe alot of them back in the day were bought and paid and if they werent they were burnt at the stake for too accurate translating
No way scholars in the 16-17 centuries were better than the current scholars. Beside the fact that more manuscripts have been discovered.
The KJB scholars would make modern scholars look like children, infants even! The so called hand full Alexandrian manuscripts all have serious 🧐 problems? The Alexandrinus was declared a fraudulent by Jerome in the 4th century. The Vaticanus was declared a fraud, and rejected by Erasmus. Which all the Reformers, and reform era scholars concurred with! The Sinaiticus supposedly discovered by Constantine Tischendorf (a known money hungry liar)in the early mid 19th century, but was actually created by Constantine Simonides using old vellum in the early mid 19th century. David Daniels with Chick Publications has a video series that systematically shows that it was made by Simonides. He also has evidence with independent chemical testing that shows that the ink is 19th century, both written, and art!
Current scholars, since the 19th century, view bible translation as any other book, using theory-based methods as were used for the classics, as well as a completely modified new Greek new testament. This is far removed from the evidence-based textual criticism used by the 16-17 century scholars. These two concepts are completely different. They were much better than modern scholars. The thousands of manuscripts that have been discovered align with the kjv (aside from the heretical manuscripts found with them.)
@@brianhaley4471 Amen, agreed! 👍
You might enjoy this short video that shows the mathematical perfection, as designed by God in the KJB. It was certainly not done by any person who could have possibly thought it up, much less, actually orchestrated by man.
ua-cam.com/users/shorts3xhdwGDnoYg?feature=share
@@brianhaley4471well said brother