The LSB quickly became my main translation after i got a copy, i love it and i thank the Lord for the brothers who have worked so hard to make it. They are some of the best quality Bibles you can get for the price and the verse by verse single column text block and font is the most comfortable I've had the chance to read. I still love my ESV and read it next to the LSB
I like the LSB. I’m a KJV guy but will pick up the LSB for myself & my family. I have little ones who find the flow of the KJV to be hard to comprehend. I will always prefer the KJV, but definitely like the LSB over the 20’ NASB & ESV. I would just get the 95’ NASB but like the use of Yahweh over Lord. It’s simply preference. Be Blessed.
I wish they had put out a notebook, or full sized LSB NT/Psalms/Proverbs first, instead of the tiny pocket sized. A 21 year old can read 8 point type, 10, or 12 point. The silver haired amongst the flock cannot. We also tend to lose, forget, sit on our cheater glasses often. I even drove over a pair with my truck. Pre-kudos to the first publisher that gets that right.
Everyone is a Greek scholar and textual expert until they’re not. A little knowledge can be a dangerous thing. The LSB, ESV, NASB, KJV, NKJV, NRSV, NIV and NLT are all good to excellent translations. Those “experts“ who quibble over one verse or two should instead be thanking God we have so many wonderful resources at our disposal in the English language. Some cultures have nothing!
The decision for “Jesus” in Jude 5 was not based on the CBGM, but on the early documentary evidence supported also by the Jesus reading in the Tyndale House GNT and the SBL GNT.
Thank you for the information sir. I for one am very much looking forward to the publishing of the LSB. Listening to the round table discussions was very enjoyable and educational. Though I'm not a native English speaker, but am, by God's grace, more or less fluent in it as a second language, I do partake in the tremendous blessing of having access to and being able to read English translations of Scripture, benefit from them greatly, learn and grow in faith. I can only hope and pray that we would get a translation in my language some day done entirely and exclusively from the original languages, that would be on the level of NASB or LSB in accuracy and consistency, done by faithful and conservative people. There is an interdenominational translation in the works (for quite a while now), but based on few information we have, as well as the society's that's organizing the task previous work on a revision of already less than good translation, it does not look promising, unfortunately. I'm grateful for the LSB. For sure, Christians of all languages throughout the world will benefit from and be blessed by it. God bless
However it was decided, Scripture agrees with it especially based on the end sentence of 1 Corinthians 10:1-4: “For I do not want you to be ignorant of the fact, brothers and sisters, that our ancestors were all under the cloud and that they all passed through the sea. They were all baptized into Moses in the cloud and in the sea. They all ate the same spiritual food and drank the same spiritual drink; for they drank from the spiritual rock that accompanied them, and that rock was Christ.”
PS I use the Tecarta also ... I have the utmost respect for the Bible ... That Life Breathing word saved my life sir The Jehovah Witnesses use the Tetragrammaton with Raymundo Martini and Johnnas Greber .. I grew up on the 1984 NWT the Font Copyright ran out on that ... So they made changes in 2013 to dissociate ... I left shortly after ... For the record sir ... I was born in 1985 ... Thank you, very much
The normative format of hand copying and then printing Bibles throughout history was to put all words in the same color ink. Putting Christ's words in red is actually a fairly recent thing, around last 100 years or so. The thing is, all Scripture is God-breathed (2 Timothy 3:16-17), no matter who spoke the words or write them. Christ's sermons in the Bible are not more God-breathed than, for example, Paul's sermons in the Bible (or his epistles for that matter). Also, words spoken directly by Christ are not more authoritative than words spoken by Paul - because Christ revealed those words through Paul, as he was carried by the Holy Spirit (2 Peter 1:20-21) Those words are written down for us, and are equally God's word, whether Jesus - God in the flesh - spoke them, or Paul. And even if a Bible has Christ's words in red, it is not always easy to determine whether or not He is the one speaking. For example, in John 3, there is a difference of opinion whether Jesus is still speaking in verse 16 and following, or is this John the author of the gospel record providing commentary, after finishing quoting Jesus' speech to Nicodemus in verse 15. Original Greek didn't even have quotation marks, let alone red letters. But Jesus saying it doesn't make it more true than if John said it. In the end, since it is contained in the Scripture it is true and authoritative. While red letters can be helpful, it shouldn't impact our reading and interpretation of the Bible whatsoever. And likewise, chapter and verse divisions shouldn't either. Both are man-made systems to help navigate through the Bible and find text in it more easily, but are not God-breathed revelation, and are not infallible - in fact, sometimes are very unfortunate and even distracting from contextual reading. I hope this helps.
@@File001 thank you for taking the time to respond and giving such a thorough explanation. I appreciate it and will be printing that reply out. It was very helpful! ✝️
@@File001 After reading your YT channel description and scrolling around your channel . I definitely subscribed . Thank you and Praise our Sovereign Almighty God! ✝️
You certainly can buy Hebrew and Greek Bibles on the internet (I usually recommend Book Depository, because they have free shipping worldwide, but if you live in the USA you have more options with reasonable shipping cost). But for the Jeffery Rice rebinds (ptlbiblerebinding.com/), like the ones he has, you would have to spend a bit more.
Last word. The CBGM is to blame for the conjectural emendation in the NA28 of 2 Peter 3:10. I assure you that the LSB did NOT follow that CBGM reading!
Yes. The LSB adopted the reading "found out" instead of "burned up" and the NA28 conjectural emendation I believe. That was the correct choice in my opinion. I'll be switching to the LSB from the NASB 1995 when it comes out.
Dr Frank logsdon. Co-founder, New American standard version. "I must under God denounce every attachment to The New American standard version. I'm afraid I'm in trouble with the Lord, I wrote The format. I wrote the preface. When you see the preface to the new American standard, those are my words, it's wrong, it's terribly wrong. It's frightfully wrong.. the deletions are absolutely frightening.. there are so many... Are we so naive that we do not suspect satanic deception in all of this?"
The problem with finding one fragment that says Jesus is just because it's early doesn't mean that's what the original said, could be a very early error that was carried on. You would need lots of early copies saying the same thing and none with the other variant until much later to have a case. Also, God would not have allowed the most accepted reading in all the churches to be the wrong one used throughout the ages. Since the word is incorrruptable and passed down through the ages.
This is not Dr. White's channel, I just post clips of what I found educational for me personally, and usually make my own comments in the video description and try to link further relevant materials that would benefit the viewer. This is actually not an error in the LSB. NASB, ESV and NET, for example, also say "eagle", following the Nestle-Aland / UBS critical text, since "eagle" (αετου) is attested by major early witnesses (Sinaiticus, Vaticanus). "Angel" (αγγελου) is the Majority text / Textus Receptus reading.
I use the Doubleday Jerusalem Bible ... YHWH 1966. ... Respect .. Thank you sir ... Yahshuah Hammeshiac ... Hebrews 11 5. And the Parable of Hannoch / Enoch ... Melch
The Peshita does not have "Lord" or "Jesus". It says "God". So the original language that Jude was written does not agree with any of the Greek manuscript translations.
Of course, there is no evidence that the New Testament was originally written in Aramaic and then translated into Greek. The grammar and syntax of the Greek NT in no way indicates it was translated from another language, as you have with the Greek Septuagint, where in some cases the phrasing has clear indications of Hebrew expressions it was based on.
@@File001 That is a completely false statement. There are very learned language scholars that point out that the koine greek found in the New Testament is of such crass character that it is obvious it has been translated from a different language. Grammatical mistakes abound. Especially bad are most of Luke and all of Revelation. They have even shown that if one back translates word for word the Greek into Aramaic one sees perfect grammatical and elegant Aramaic. It's quite obvious.
Let us all be honest and realistic. I agree with James white with what he said 10 years ago in his debate with heretic Steven Anderson. I agree that the true reason for LSB coming out is easy to recognize, MONEY. Duh. It’s just for money. Now look, I love JMac and GTY, but I refuse to go along with the other beta MacArthur Bros and pretend that MacArthur isn’t using his platform to make some money for GTY and Masters. There is no need for another translation. It’s all about money. Another issue being his closing of his church in 2020 for months and only declaring that they’re open once the sanctuary was packed with 5,000 who all came on their own for weeks. It pained me to have people use macarthurs videos from his office justifying his continued closure as proof that I was wrong for keep the church I pastor open. I’m just over all these people pretending something isn’t so just because of their love for MacArthur
So what is the decision for Jude Jesus or Lord? "And the Lord went before them by day in a pillar of a cloud, to lead them the way; and by night in a pillar of fire, to give them light; to go by day and night:" Ex 13V21 It is obvious the word is the "Lord" that led them. This is where the confusion comes from a, corruption in the Alexandrian texts. So much time and energy wasted on trying to justify modern translations, where the NIV has Lord, the ESV has Jesus and so on and the Legacy Standard is just one more to add to the mess. Even though Dr White struggles with "these folks" I use an NIV and ESV Bibles, however I can see for consistency of translation integrity the KJV is just better. It should be the gold standard. CGBM What you have here is, Cement Ground Bituminous Mix
Makes absolutely zero sense to have an entire bible in English but have God's name in Hebrew instead of the accepted English name God or My Lord. Not to mention Jews won't even speak it out of respect and we probably shouldn't either.
Then it makes zero sense to have the Hebrew name Adam, but instead render it in English as Man or Human. It makes perfect sense to retain the name Yahweh since it is unique to the one and true Creator God, "He who is" (Exodus 3:14), which is what the name Yahweh means. I recommend you read an excellent note on this in the NET Bible netbible.org/bible/Exodus+3 (note no. 48) As regards to the Jewish unbiblical (and superstitious) tradition to not pronounce the name Yahweh, we are under no obligation to follow it, as it was never commanded by Scripture. Jews have a bad historical record of adding human traditions to God's commands (just read Jesus' dealings with them in the gospels), and this is one of them. Christians are under no obligation to follow it. If anything, Yahweh specifically reveals it to His people as a name to be remembered for all generations: And God furthermore said to Moses, “Thus you shall say to the sons of Israel, ‘Yahweh, the God of your fathers, the God of Abraham, the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob, has sent me to you.’ This is My name forever, and this is My memorial-name from generation to generation. (Exodus 3:15)
What problem are we solving? Are we just making money or solving an issue? With so many bogus Bibles, do we really need another? Enough already! LSB----soon we will have the lesbian Study Bible, too!
I suggest you educate yourself on the issue of Bible translations before commenting on it, sir. Not only does your comment display ignorance, but is also slanderous. A Christian should not act like this.
It slanders the faith itself to have dozens of "interpretations". If we can not depend on the word being properly translated, then there is no dependable word. That is my point. I have 15 translations in my Library. 14 of the them are unneccesary or incorrect.@@File001
The proliferation of Bible translations is much about 1. making money selling them. and 2. Writing one's philosophy into the scriptures (or removing what one does like) so as to more easily defend one's current doctrinal stand. Let's cut out this nonsense. @@File001
Psalm 12:6,7. King James Bible 6 The words of the Lord are pure words: as silver tried in a furnace of earth, purified seven times. 7 Thou shalt keep them, O Lord, thou shalt preserve them from this generation for ever. There were 6 English bibles before the KJB. It's the 7th. The KJB is the preserved word of God, the bible that psalm 12:6,7 KJV is talking about. Revelation warns of changing God's word. What is wrong with you guys? May God open your eyes and lead you to repentance
Basically, what you are saying is that before 1611 a complete, preserved copy of the Bible did not exist in any language (meaning that God failed to preserve His Word prior to that), and that since 1611 the complete, preserved Bible is exclusively in English, and no other language (note even originally God-breathed Hebrew, Aramaic and Greek, when English did not even exist). If Psalm 12:6-7 applies only to the English Bible, as you assert (because you set the context with "seven times" referring to seven English translations), logically that means that I cannot have a perfect Bible in my native language (which is not English), but I have to learn English and read it in English - every single person throughout all ages must learn English and read it in English to fully understand God's Word, since obvious differences in languages renders it impossible to translate any text 100% word-for-word. And the same goes for all other arguments based on either the text of Scripture or chapter and verse division that are being used to point to either the King James Bible or the year 1611. I get your zeal, I once was on your side. I fully understand. But please, think about what you're saying and where your position leads to when applied consistently and logically. Especially for us who are not native English speakers, and don't live in English speaking countries - which vast majority of the world doesn't. As a fellow believer, I say this with grace, and not as an attack. In regards to your usage of Psalm 12:6-7 to defend King James Only position, I would encourage you to listen to this with an open mind. ua-cam.com/video/ZEAUKXAICbk/v-deo.html
The KJV translators would tell you that it was not their intention to make a new translation but to make a good translation better. Prior to the KJV there were seven English translations and the KJV translators said even the meanest translation is the word of God. So you are calling the KJV translators liars. Also Galatians 2"21 I do not frustrate the grace of God for if righteousness came by the law then Christ IS DEAD IN VAIN. A contradiction of the resurrection. Your arrogance and ignorance and gullible nature is anything but commendable.
The KJV is NOT the 7th English Bible. The predecessors were The Wycliffe Bible, The Tyndale Bible, The Coverdale Bible, The Matthew Bible, The Taverner Bible, The Great Bible, The Geneva Bible, The Bishops' Bible, The Douay-Rheims Bible, followed by the King James Version. The KJV is the tenth.
The KJB is translated for political purposes and nothing more. It was a means of control. It has hundreds of mistranslations such as the word Witch, which was used to kill thousands.
Psalm 12:6-8 [6] The words of the LORD are pure words, like silver refined in a furnace on the ground, purified seven times. [7] You, O LORD, will keep them; you will guard us from this generation forever. [8] On every side the wicked prowl, as vileness is exalted among the children of man. ESV says this as well, and i could make the same argument about the ESV with the same logic. But what does the context tell us? Is the context that every English word of the kjv is pure? Or is the context that God will keep his word to his people, and defeat the enemies that he has told them he’ll defeat. It’s not that we don’t believe gods word is pure- but that passage isn’t talking about English translations. It’s talking about God keeping his word
Oh wow, another new and improved English Bible. No thanks, I'll stick with the good-ole King James version, which is THE HOLY BIBE for all English speaking people.
@@DeepDiveDiscipleship Be kind. But your point is well taken. For a person well pastored, mentored, and experienced the KJV is a wonderful translation. But you are right that it is hard to understand for a new reader. You only have to go back another eighty to a hundred years from the era of the KJV translation for the "English" to be totally incomprehensible to a modern english speaker.
The translators of the KJV1611 said in their preface that when better manuscripts became a available then the English translation was to be improved upon. And English has changed since 1611 so that there are over 300 dead words contained in the KJV. The LSB is the greatest English translation in this or any age.
@@RyGuy8989 I've read that through the ages languages have changed at a rate of 10% per century. I'd posit that rate has risen quickly since the origins of ... first ... mass rapid worldwide travel, and then faster with internet.
Read Jude 5 in the KJV and then the LSB or ESV. Which one sounds better to you? I could make the argument that the KJV is trying to deny Jesus Christ his deity by not saying that Jesus saved them out of Egypt. See how that works?
To me the issue is simple and very straightforward. If you believe that Jesus is Lord then everything is alright!
The LSB quickly became my main translation after i got a copy, i love it and i thank the Lord for the brothers who have worked so hard to make it. They are some of the best quality Bibles you can get for the price and the verse by verse single column text block and font is the most comfortable I've had the chance to read. I still love my ESV and read it next to the LSB
I like the LSB. I’m a KJV guy but will pick up the LSB for myself & my family. I have little ones who find the flow of the KJV to be hard to comprehend. I will always prefer the KJV, but definitely like the LSB over the 20’ NASB & ESV. I would just get the 95’ NASB but like the use of Yahweh over Lord. It’s simply preference. Be Blessed.
Thank you, Dr. White for sharing background information regarding bible translations based on the CBGM resource. Very interesting.
I wish they had put out a notebook, or full sized LSB NT/Psalms/Proverbs first, instead of the tiny pocket sized. A 21 year old can read 8 point type, 10, or 12 point. The silver haired amongst the flock cannot. We also tend to lose, forget, sit on our cheater glasses often. I even drove over a pair with my truck. Pre-kudos to the first publisher that gets that right.
😂 Amen to that!!! 😂😂
Everyone is a Greek scholar and textual expert until they’re not. A little knowledge can be a dangerous thing. The LSB, ESV, NASB, KJV, NKJV, NRSV, NIV and NLT are all good to excellent translations. Those “experts“ who quibble over one verse or two should instead be thanking God we have so many wonderful resources at our disposal in the English language. Some cultures have nothing!
Amen, we have an embarrassment of riches here in the western English speaking Nations. We are blessed being measure
The most obvious spirit filled commonsense rare and I believe absolutely correct opinion on all of this translation drama. ❤
The decision for “Jesus” in Jude 5 was not based on the CBGM, but on the early documentary evidence supported also by the Jesus reading in the Tyndale House GNT and the SBL GNT.
Thank you for the information sir.
I for one am very much looking forward to the publishing of the LSB. Listening to the round table discussions was very enjoyable and educational. Though I'm not a native English speaker, but am, by God's grace, more or less fluent in it as a second language, I do partake in the tremendous blessing of having access to and being able to read English translations of Scripture, benefit from them greatly, learn and grow in faith.
I can only hope and pray that we would get a translation in my language some day done entirely and exclusively from the original languages, that would be on the level of NASB or LSB in accuracy and consistency, done by faithful and conservative people. There is an interdenominational translation in the works (for quite a while now), but based on few information we have, as well as the society's that's organizing the task previous work on a revision of already less than good translation, it does not look promising, unfortunately.
I'm grateful for the LSB. For sure, Christians of all languages throughout the world will benefit from and be blessed by it.
God bless
Its also from Codex B
The earliest evidence doesn't support "Jesus" in Jude 5
However it was decided, Scripture agrees with it especially based on the end sentence of 1 Corinthians 10:1-4:
“For I do not want you to be ignorant of the fact, brothers and sisters, that our ancestors were all under the cloud and that they all passed through the sea. They were all baptized into Moses in the cloud and in the sea. They all ate the same spiritual food and drank the same spiritual drink; for they drank from the spiritual rock that accompanied them, and that rock was Christ.”
Covid socialism remark is precious.
PS I use the Tecarta also ... I have the utmost respect for the Bible ... That Life Breathing word saved my life sir The Jehovah Witnesses use the Tetragrammaton with Raymundo Martini and Johnnas Greber .. I grew up on the 1984 NWT the Font Copyright ran out on that ... So they made changes in 2013 to dissociate ... I left shortly after ... For the record sir ... I was born in 1985 ... Thank you, very much
QUESTION ?? I would like to know why some bibles don’t have the words of Christ in red . specifically JMAC , R.C. Sproul , ESV Study Bible ? Thank you
The normative format of hand copying and then printing Bibles throughout history was to put all words in the same color ink. Putting Christ's words in red is actually a fairly recent thing, around last 100 years or so.
The thing is, all Scripture is God-breathed (2 Timothy 3:16-17), no matter who spoke the words or write them. Christ's sermons in the Bible are not more God-breathed than, for example, Paul's sermons in the Bible (or his epistles for that matter). Also, words spoken directly by Christ are not more authoritative than words spoken by Paul - because Christ revealed those words through Paul, as he was carried by the Holy Spirit (2 Peter 1:20-21) Those words are written down for us, and are equally God's word, whether Jesus - God in the flesh - spoke them, or Paul.
And even if a Bible has Christ's words in red, it is not always easy to determine whether or not He is the one speaking. For example, in John 3, there is a difference of opinion whether Jesus is still speaking in verse 16 and following, or is this John the author of the gospel record providing commentary, after finishing quoting Jesus' speech to Nicodemus in verse 15. Original Greek didn't even have quotation marks, let alone red letters. But Jesus saying it doesn't make it more true than if John said it. In the end, since it is contained in the Scripture it is true and authoritative.
While red letters can be helpful, it shouldn't impact our reading and interpretation of the Bible whatsoever. And likewise, chapter and verse divisions shouldn't either. Both are man-made systems to help navigate through the Bible and find text in it more easily, but are not God-breathed revelation, and are not infallible - in fact, sometimes are very unfortunate and even distracting from contextual reading.
I hope this helps.
@@File001 thank you for taking the time to respond and giving such a thorough explanation. I appreciate it and will be printing that reply out. It was very helpful! ✝️
@@File001 After reading your YT channel description and scrolling around your channel . I definitely subscribed . Thank you and Praise our Sovereign Almighty God! ✝️
TL;DR they just put Jesus's words in black ;)
The CSB has “Jesus” as well in Jude 5.
I really want a Greek and Hebrew translation that james white has!
You certainly can buy Hebrew and Greek Bibles on the internet (I usually recommend Book Depository, because they have free shipping worldwide, but if you live in the USA you have more options with reasonable shipping cost). But for the Jeffery Rice rebinds (ptlbiblerebinding.com/), like the ones he has, you would have to spend a bit more.
Christian Standard Bible (CSB) has Jesus in Jude 5
also makes lucifer jesus in isaiah 14.12
Last word. The CBGM is to blame for the conjectural emendation in the NA28 of 2 Peter 3:10. I assure you that the LSB did NOT follow that CBGM reading!
Yes. The LSB adopted the reading "found out" instead of "burned up" and the NA28 conjectural emendation I believe. That was the correct choice in my opinion. I'll be switching to the LSB from the NASB 1995 when it comes out.
Dr Frank logsdon. Co-founder, New American standard version. "I must under God denounce every attachment to The New American standard version. I'm afraid I'm in trouble with the Lord, I wrote The format. I wrote the preface. When you see the preface to the new American standard, those are my words, it's wrong, it's terribly wrong. It's frightfully wrong.. the deletions are absolutely frightening.. there are so many... Are we so naive that we do not suspect satanic deception in all of this?"
The King James is the Bible with legacy
The problem with finding one fragment that says Jesus is just because it's early doesn't mean that's what the original said, could be a very early error that was carried on. You would need lots of early copies saying the same thing and none with the other variant until much later to have a case. Also, God would not have allowed the most accepted reading in all the churches to be the wrong one used throughout the ages. Since the word is incorrruptable and passed down through the ages.
It was far more than ONE fragment...In the early manuscripts it was the most consistent translation...Jesus, not the LORD.
Dr.White I love your teaching. I also have a LSB Bible and found an error, rev.8:13and heard an angel, mine says eagle instead of angel🤔
God bless!
This is not Dr. White's channel, I just post clips of what I found educational for me personally, and usually make my own comments in the video description and try to link further relevant materials that would benefit the viewer.
This is actually not an error in the LSB. NASB, ESV and NET, for example, also say "eagle", following the Nestle-Aland / UBS critical text, since "eagle" (αετου) is attested by major early witnesses (Sinaiticus, Vaticanus). "Angel" (αγγελου) is the Majority text / Textus Receptus reading.
@File001 Thank-you for setting me straight on two accounts!😊
That is the 95’ NASB reading as well.
That’s in every Bible not using the MT/TR
Jude 5 is Jesus Christ in ESV and The Lord is NASB
I use the Doubleday Jerusalem Bible ... YHWH 1966. ... Respect .. Thank you sir ... Yahshuah Hammeshiac ... Hebrews 11 5. And the Parable of Hannoch / Enoch ... Melch
This bible is great. Closer to the greek text. Whats your issue here. Go and check it out before periphically just condemning
"Jesus" in Jude 5 is from Codex B btw
The Peshita does not have "Lord" or "Jesus". It says "God". So the original language that Jude was written does not agree with any of the Greek manuscript translations.
Of course, there is no evidence that the New Testament was originally written in Aramaic and then translated into Greek. The grammar and syntax of the Greek NT in no way indicates it was translated from another language, as you have with the Greek Septuagint, where in some cases the phrasing has clear indications of Hebrew expressions it was based on.
@@File001 That is a completely false statement. There are very learned language scholars that point out that the koine greek found in the New Testament is of such crass character that it is obvious it has been translated from a different language. Grammatical mistakes abound. Especially bad are most of Luke and all of Revelation. They have even shown that if one back translates word for word the Greek into Aramaic one sees perfect grammatical and elegant Aramaic. It's quite obvious.
Jesus is Lord...so what's the problem
Let us all be honest and realistic. I agree with James white with what he said 10 years ago in his debate with heretic Steven Anderson. I agree that the true reason for LSB coming out is easy to recognize, MONEY. Duh. It’s just for money. Now look, I love JMac and GTY, but I refuse to go along with the other beta MacArthur Bros and pretend that MacArthur isn’t using his platform to make some money for GTY and Masters. There is no need for another translation. It’s all about money. Another issue being his closing of his church in 2020 for months and only declaring that they’re open once the sanctuary was packed with 5,000 who all came on their own for weeks. It pained me to have people use macarthurs videos from his office justifying his continued closure as proof that I was wrong for keep the church I pastor open. I’m just over all these people pretending something isn’t so just because of their love for MacArthur
The love and concern for souls just oozes!! NOT! Get a real doctorate or quit calling yourself “doctor”, doctor!!
So what is the decision for Jude Jesus or Lord?
"And the Lord went before them by day in a pillar of a cloud, to lead them the way; and by night in a pillar of fire, to give them light; to go by day and night:"
Ex 13V21
It is obvious the word is the "Lord" that led them. This is where the confusion comes from a, corruption in the Alexandrian texts. So much time and energy wasted on trying to justify modern translations, where the NIV has Lord, the ESV has Jesus and so on and the Legacy Standard is just one more to add to the mess.
Even though Dr White struggles with "these folks" I use an NIV and ESV Bibles, however I can see for consistency of translation integrity the KJV is just better. It should be the gold standard.
CGBM What you have here is, Cement Ground Bituminous Mix
This was a pointless conversation.
This man is by far the least gracious christian I have seen on the UA-cam. For a man with no hair he is the ultimate hair splitter!
Makes absolutely zero sense to have an entire bible in English but have God's name in Hebrew instead of the accepted English name God or My Lord. Not to mention Jews won't even speak it out of respect and we probably shouldn't either.
Then it makes zero sense to have the Hebrew name Adam, but instead render it in English as Man or Human.
It makes perfect sense to retain the name Yahweh since it is unique to the one and true Creator God, "He who is" (Exodus 3:14), which is what the name Yahweh means. I recommend you read an excellent note on this in the NET Bible netbible.org/bible/Exodus+3 (note no. 48)
As regards to the Jewish unbiblical (and superstitious) tradition to not pronounce the name Yahweh, we are under no obligation to follow it, as it was never commanded by Scripture. Jews have a bad historical record of adding human traditions to God's commands (just read Jesus' dealings with them in the gospels), and this is one of them. Christians are under no obligation to follow it.
If anything, Yahweh specifically reveals it to His people as a name to be remembered for all generations:
And God furthermore said to Moses, “Thus you shall say to the sons of Israel, ‘Yahweh, the God of your fathers, the God of Abraham, the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob, has sent me to you.’ This is My name forever, and this is My memorial-name from generation to generation. (Exodus 3:15)
What problem are we solving? Are we just making money or solving an issue? With so many bogus Bibles, do we really need another? Enough already! LSB----soon we will have the lesbian Study Bible, too!
I suggest you educate yourself on the issue of Bible translations before commenting on it, sir. Not only does your comment display ignorance, but is also slanderous. A Christian should not act like this.
It slanders the faith itself to have dozens of "interpretations". If we can not depend on the word being properly translated, then there is no dependable word. That is my point. I have 15 translations in my Library. 14 of the them are unneccesary or incorrect.@@File001
The proliferation of Bible translations is much about 1. making money selling them. and 2. Writing one's philosophy into the scriptures (or removing what one does like) so as to more easily defend one's current doctrinal stand. Let's cut out this nonsense. @@File001
Psalm 12:6,7.
King James Bible
6 The words of the Lord are pure words: as silver tried in a furnace of earth, purified seven times.
7 Thou shalt keep them, O Lord, thou shalt preserve them from this generation for ever.
There were 6 English bibles before the KJB. It's the 7th. The KJB is the preserved word of God, the bible that psalm 12:6,7 KJV is talking about. Revelation warns of changing God's word. What is wrong with you guys? May God open your eyes and lead you to repentance
Basically, what you are saying is that before 1611 a complete, preserved copy of the Bible did not exist in any language (meaning that God failed to preserve His Word prior to that), and that since 1611 the complete, preserved Bible is exclusively in English, and no other language (note even originally God-breathed Hebrew, Aramaic and Greek, when English did not even exist).
If Psalm 12:6-7 applies only to the English Bible, as you assert (because you set the context with "seven times" referring to seven English translations), logically that means that I cannot have a perfect Bible in my native language (which is not English), but I have to learn English and read it in English - every single person throughout all ages must learn English and read it in English to fully understand God's Word, since obvious differences in languages renders it impossible to translate any text 100% word-for-word.
And the same goes for all other arguments based on either the text of Scripture or chapter and verse division that are being used to point to either the King James Bible or the year 1611.
I get your zeal, I once was on your side. I fully understand.
But please, think about what you're saying and where your position leads to when applied consistently and logically. Especially for us who are not native English speakers, and don't live in English speaking countries - which vast majority of the world doesn't.
As a fellow believer, I say this with grace, and not as an attack.
In regards to your usage of Psalm 12:6-7 to defend King James Only position, I would encourage you to listen to this with an open mind.
ua-cam.com/video/ZEAUKXAICbk/v-deo.html
The KJV translators would tell you that it was not their intention to make a new translation but to make a good translation better. Prior to the KJV there were seven English translations and the KJV translators said even the meanest translation is the word of God. So you are calling the KJV translators liars. Also Galatians 2"21 I do not frustrate the grace of God for if righteousness came by the law then Christ IS DEAD IN VAIN. A contradiction of the resurrection. Your arrogance and ignorance and gullible nature is anything but commendable.
The KJV is NOT the 7th English Bible. The predecessors were The Wycliffe Bible, The Tyndale Bible, The Coverdale Bible, The Matthew Bible, The Taverner Bible, The Great Bible, The Geneva Bible, The Bishops' Bible, The Douay-Rheims Bible, followed by the King James Version. The KJV is the tenth.
The KJB is translated for political purposes and nothing more. It was a means of control. It has hundreds of mistranslations such as the word Witch, which was used to kill thousands.
Psalm 12:6-8
[6] The words of the LORD are pure words,
like silver refined in a furnace on the ground,
purified seven times.
[7] You, O LORD, will keep them;
you will guard us from this generation forever.
[8] On every side the wicked prowl,
as vileness is exalted among the children of man.
ESV says this as well, and i could make the same argument about the ESV with the same logic.
But what does the context tell us? Is the context that every English word of the kjv is pure? Or is the context that God will keep his word to his people, and defeat the enemies that he has told them he’ll defeat.
It’s not that we don’t believe gods word is pure- but that passage isn’t talking about English translations. It’s talking about God keeping his word
Oh wow, another new and improved English Bible. No thanks, I'll stick with the good-ole King James version, which is THE HOLY BIBE for all English speaking people.
Nonsense of all nonsenses. God speaks 17th-century English, huh?
@@DeepDiveDiscipleship Be kind. But your point is well taken. For a person well pastored, mentored, and experienced the KJV is a wonderful translation. But you are right that it is hard to understand for a new reader. You only have to go back another eighty to a hundred years from the era of the KJV translation for the "English" to be totally incomprehensible to a modern english speaker.
The translators of the KJV1611 said in their preface that when better manuscripts became a available then the English translation was to be improved upon. And English has changed since 1611 so that there are over 300 dead words contained in the KJV. The LSB is the greatest English translation in this or any age.
@@RyGuy8989 I've read that through the ages languages have changed at a rate of 10% per century. I'd posit that rate has risen quickly since the origins of ... first ... mass rapid worldwide travel, and then faster with internet.
Read Jude 5 in the KJV and then the LSB or ESV. Which one sounds better to you? I could make the argument that the KJV is trying to deny Jesus Christ his deity by not saying that Jesus saved them out of Egypt. See how that works?
another calvinistic/cessationist translation, MacArthur's bias is everywhere in the LSB
which translation do you prefer?