One thing that wasn't never taught in American History. The first settlers of New England carried this Bible!! It makes sense to call the Geneva Bible the Pilgrims Bible!!!
It is important to note the differences in this way too, The Geneva Bible was created to be a home study bible. Used in homes where believers gathered, like the first Christians mentioned in the Bible. From the beginning the Geneva was meant to be read by individual believers. The King James 1611 was only made in a pulpit size from what I have read with the heading: "Appointed to be read in churches." This is an entirely different situation. Anglican churches are a break away from the Roman Catholic. Anglicans use the Rosary and confessional booth. The KJV saying it is appointed to be read in churches by the minister. Implies its intention initially was not for individuals to read at home, but only in the state churches, by individuals qualified to lead an Anglican service.
@@williamjhunter5714 Also the King wanted supremacy over the faith. King James wanted to undercut the Puritans and despised them!!! Keep in mind the Church of England was under threat by the Puritan movement.
This is one of my favorite translations. It was highly influential and should get more recognition. I recently purchased a copy printed in modern typeface from Tolle Lege Press.
i bought the patriots edition used and then ordered a leatherbound version for my daughter and then ordered a new patriots edition to keep pristine so i can use my first one as a carry around bible.
Those "f" looking letters are called a "long S." They were a typesetting convention of the time, and followed certain rules as to when they could be used. You will also find letters like ae are often pushed together into a single letter. Dont let any of this freak you out. If it looks like an "f" but with a curly bottom tail and a very small cross bar, then it is simply an "s" and should be pronounced as an "s." After an hour or so, you'll hardly notice the long s. Same goes for the pushed together letters. They are usually just exactly what they look like. Oh, and spelling wasn't standardized yet. So if it looks like "ftarre" thats just star, spelled a bit differently with a long s at the beginning. Just say the word out loud and you'll see that most of it is very phonetic, even if spelled strangely to our modern eyes.
I've been reading this one occasionally on a bible version app. I really like it. KJV is my main bible, though. I think about the poor people who couldn't own a bible back in the day. We forget how blessed we are.
This version and an the archeological bible are my go to bibles. The footnote are amazing in Geneva in respects to understanding History was repeating itself in imperialist tyrannical papacy. Catholics were from the Nicolatians. Jesus said “ I hate what they are doing!” They were continuing to mix their pagan rituals with a little Jesus. The Geneva also includes the apocrypha and maccabees. Macabee revolt would of been veeeeeery unpopular to King James. Those that worked on the Geneva ran for their lives. The king wanted his name and his version in every household as a counter move. He also included a hymnal to be given to all the commoners.
Not knowing much about the different bible versions while pondering this I had a revelation from God the number 1599 popped in my head I did a search and low and behold the Geneva 1599 bible came up. The footnotes are invaluable in this version I believe the footnotes are revelations from God too
One of my ten ancestors who came over on the Mayflower to colonize in the New World was John Alden, the ship's cooper and carpenter. He brought his personal copy of the 1611 King James Version and his Bible is still in the family today, seen in the Alden House, now a museum in Duxbury, Massachusetts where John Alden built a house for his wife Priscilla Mullins, also a Mayflower passenger, and their family of ten.
Geneva Bible Ephesians 6:12 tells who or what is running the world, and what god. Princes of darkness, world of government. Compared to you King James version, who was king james?????
Yes! Nauling it! I will tell you who he was. King James was a sinister bully bloke and a person who practised unholy counter-marital practises, to say the least. He was NEVER a follower of The Lord, and was in opposition to The Lord Christ and His Church, since he mustered all his wits and guts to persecute Puritans and all the true Christ-following Saints within all his vast kingdom of Wales and England (he was afraid to tread down the Saints in Scotland, however, since they had a way powerful lobby).Moreover, he loathfully abhorred the True Bible of the Protestant Reformation, the Geneva Bible, whose footnotes did convict this pathetic tyrant to the core. That was, actually the primary cause of arranging a new translation which was named after him, but which turned out to be nothing but plagiarism and severe affront to The Lord. If we catch a glance of conscientious and diligent scrutiny, we may definitely perceive that not only was King James a tyrant and immoral person, but he akso was a top ranking freemason who also appointed his chief freemason Francis Bacon to tak care over the venture of editing his Project. As a cogent vindication of it, there are even certain verses in this so-called 'flawless" Project which are whatever but flawless when being perused in a serious and diligent way. For example, the passage of Psalm 24;6 it reads, "This is the generation of them that seek him, of them that seek thy face, O Jacob" - so, WHOSE face should one seek? The face of Jacob, or the face of God? The Geneva renreds it correctly: "that seek thy face, THIS IS Jacob". Te difference is straightforward. Another example. Mark 16:18 "And they shall take up serpents". Are the Bible translators at loggerheads with the English language? Certainly not! The Geneva Bible says it correctly: "And they shall TAKE AWAY serpents". That is, exterminate them. Exactly accommodating what The Lord had said, "I give you power to tread on snakes and scorpions, and nothing shall by any means harm you". Also, in Acts chapter 12 they mentioned the celebration of easter , when when esther is the demon idol of fetility. Did Israel with its kings pay homages tro idols? Never! The CORRECT word is "The Passover" which stands in the Geneva Bible. One more affront towards God can be found in Genesis 22:1, where the KJV states of Abraham as "tempting" God. It sounds even like blasphemy, since God never tempts any human being and not humans. He tempts no one, the Letter of James chapter 1 in the New Testament specifies it so clearly and pertinently. On the other hand, the Geneva faithfully translates this passages this way: "God proved Abraham". God proves, but never tempts. So, that said, any reasonable-minded human being will elicit appropriate inference and connect the dots adequately
@@1Corinthians15.1-4 Because of when it was published the 1560's spelling and font used is difficult to read. The 1599 has spelling like we use, and archaic words we find difficult to understand updated with modern equivalents. An example is the KJ21, which is an updated KJV.
I have the 1560 Geneva Bible published by Hendrickson, Peabody, Massachusetts. It isn't modern English, it is a facsimile production of an old Bible from owned by the University of Wisconsin. The English, similar to the 1611 Authorized Version, is Elizabethan English, Shakespeare's English. It's an archaic language, but not really as foreign as one might think. With a little practice, reading the Geneva Bible or the 1611 KJV/AV becomes a joy. The notes in the Hendrickson publication can be hard to read without a magnifying glass, probably because the facsimile copy isn't the same size as the original.
In England it was forbidden to translate the Bible into a vernacular language. Tyndale had to take his English translation of the New Testament to Cologne to have it printed, but his endeavor was uncovered and he was forced to halt the printing and flee. After his arrival in Worms, he had a new edition printed in 1526, in around 3,000 copies. Some copies were smuggled into England and sold there, but owning a copy of Tyndale’s New Testament still attracted the death penalty. Most copies were therefore destroyed by the authorities, who regarded the distribution of the New Testament in English as a danger to the established Church. Today, only three copies of this 1526 edition of Tyndale’s New Testament are known to survive. William Tyndale paid for his work with his life. He went into hiding but was eventually arrested in Antwerp in 1535. At that time, he had produced a revised edition of the New Testament, published in 1534, a translation of the Pentateuch, published in 1530, and had begun his translation of the Old Testament. Tyndale was held prisoner in the castle of Vilvorde in Belgium, was convicted as a heretic and strangled and burned at the stake in October 1536. His translation, however, survived and found its way into subsequent editions of the Bible very soon after his death.
@@MariusVanWoerden correction - they had to get permission from the bishops. There's a lot of lies, propaganda and false news floating around by people to justify their hatred of others.
@@nathanjohnwade2289 Nothing to do with hatred. I have studied the Bible and Church History everyday since my 16 History does not lie, it is the stories men comes up with. I don’t like the name Calvinist. It sounds as if we follow a man. It is God Who decreed that Some would be saved and more than being saved would be lost for eternity. NOT Calvin. If your claim was true there was no preaching of the Gospel for at-least 1400 years. After the reformation [Calvinist] the Catholic church started persecution of those leaving the catholic church and many were burnt at the stake who did not give up their faith in Christ, one of them William Tyndale for translating the Bible in English. The Bible was a forbidden book and only allowed to read for the clergy in Latin even up to 1950 Catholics were not allowed to read the bible. 1 Corinthians 3:3 Are you not walking in the way of man? 4 For when one of you says, “I follow Paul,” and another, “I follow Apollos,” are you not mere men? 5 What then is Apollos? And what is Paul? They are servants through whom you believed, as the Lord has assigned to each his role.… The main person in the reformation spend a large part of his life in a small room in the tower of the “Wartburg Castle” heavy guarded by his friends to keep him safe from the inquisition who wanted him to be Burned at the stake. All he could do is write to teach new pastors understanding the gospel. One of the most important was his Bible translation. Calvin was a free man but his health kept him from doing much but writing. You should study history. Before the Reformation there was only the Pope church. [Catholic is the Wrong name] it means “Universal Christian.” The Reformation was not the work of a man it was God’s work to free us from the Heresies of Rome. Martin Luther was doing penance in the monastery. He was visited by Johann von Staupitz, Born: 1460 He was a Catholic theologian, university preacher, and Vicar General of the Augustinian friars in Germany, He said to Martin Luther: Martin Martin not your wounds but the Wounds of Christ. Luther later said: If it was not for Von Staupitz I would have been in Hell. I made a website with 1000th of sermons of Martin Luther in Dutch, German and English.
Thanks for the question. We know that the Covenanters preferred the Geneva Bible over the King James, but as to which year of printing they used I don't know. Possibly it depended on how available they were during that time.
In old English the letter 's' is written like an 'f'. Confusing I know, but that's the way it was. And there wasn't any uniformity in spelling, with there being several different spellings of the same word throughout any written work from that period.
I have the hardcover Hendrickson one. Once you get used to the typesetting and nonstandard spelling, it is very easy to read. I would prefer a little bigger print, but the Bible is already big and heavy. So, I read it at home.
I've have the 1560 edition of the Geneva Bible for a 7 yrs now. But one thing that was not mentioned in this video is the Apocrypha that is in this Bible.
@@thomaswilliams2273 Yeah but that doesn't has anything to do with it simply because the 1560 edition of Geneva was way before the 1611 kjv. Post stuff that makes since & don't be so stupid.
@@user-so-v9o Care then to enlighten us on what makes the AP in the Geneva Bible so special? I was assuming you were talking about most modern printed Bibles omitting it. Forgive me for not guessing the proper context of your reply.
@@thomaswilliams2273 The only thing I was simply saying to you sir, was when you were on the topic of the Geneva Bible I just simply asked you why you didn't mention the Apocrypha in the 1560 edition of the Geneva Bible. What I'm saying is,it doesn't make no sense talking about the 1611 kjv Apocrypha because the Apocrypha is in the Geneva Bible you have. And your topic is on 1560 Geneva Bible!
As others have pointed out,it’s the spelling and typesetting that makes the Geneva Bible a bit difficult to read. The language itself shouldn’t be a problem for anyone familiar with the KJV. Obviously some of the language is archaic, but footnotes in modern printings will cover that.
You can check these out: www.barnesandnoble.com/w/the-geneva-bible-hendrickson-publishers/1139965611 or if you prefer a cheaper paperback: www.amazon.com/Geneva-Bible-1560-Apocrypha-Scriptures/dp/B0CZHJGWXW. It depends where you live as to the most convenient online shop to use.
Back in those days the children were taught at home and they learned to read and write using only 2 books, the Bible and a dictionary, which was also the only 2 tools used by a true lawyer in those times, based structurally off the rules and provisions of the Magna Carta or Great Charter as to the qualities of a lawyer. Thus why they were IN Law (just as a spouse of your bother or sister would be your brother or sister-IN-Law) as Lawyers or Law Sayers versed in Biblical Law, and not "at law" (they aren't your bother or sister-AT-Law!!) like the traitorous brainwashed attorneys we have today, thus why an attorney and a lawyer ARE NOT the same thing. The word Attorn in the original Webster's Dictionary, 1828 defines the word as "to turn over homage (honor) or servitude from one lord to another". Basically to steal from someone and give it to someone else. Thus why we really have NO lawyers today because they are ALL Attornors that go to BAR brainwashing school (because BAR stands for British Admiralty Registry; Regis = King, -try = Listing of Possessions, a 'Registry' originally was a Listing of the King's property, check out John Oswalt's Etymology Dictionary of the English Language, 1848; page 52 defines the word 'ship' to mean OFFICE!! This dictionary teaches how the English language was formed from the Latin and all of its roots) to learn "LEGAL" Procedure, NOT law. The "BAR" was first introduced in America in 1909 in Illinois, and thus they were the first state to begin to betray the people by training their students in the ways of Commercial Law or Maritime Water Law. "Legal" means 'the stipulation of a contract' or agreement, and thus why 'Legal' and Lawful DO NOT mean the same thing, though most people are brainwashed to think everything must be 'legal' in order for it to be Lawful!!! Thus why most people are 'sheeple' and don't even know it. Any attorney that calls them self a 'lawyer' is in all technical right an ignorant traitorous LIAR. But unfortunately its going to take most passing from this life and facing their great day of Revelation to finally see this, after its too late. But most all of the Founding Fathers read the Geneva Bible and were referring to that version when they said the Bible was the Word of God, and hated the King James and regarded it as a blasphemy and a heresy, especially when you consider that King James was also a pedophile, its no surprise they hated him!!! This is confirmed in some of the letters they wrote back and forth to each other, especial James Madison, Thomas Jefferson, John Adams, Samuel Adams, and most of the authors of the Federalist and Anti-Federalist Papers.
I purchased an electronic Geneva bible and it was not hard to read, once you allow your brain to adjust. It isn't easy if all you read is something other than the King James bible, as the King James 1611 can also be easily read if you are familiar with the KJV. Those who use other translations for their everyday study, even the KJV (King James) is hard for many to read because it is at the twelveth grade reading level.
We have long s that look like f so the word seen is spelt feene and star ftarre East as Eaft if you keep this rule in mind you then will follow the text comfortably
I don't like the translation of Romans 5:12 in the Geneva as opposed to the KJV, because it still supports the doctrine of Original Sin from Catholicism. That is a major heresy.
Someone may have already commented about this but it is not pronounced eaft and Worfhip. The old way of writing a lower case s looks similar to an f but is not an f. Compare a word with an actual f with a word with an s like east and you will see a subtle difference.
My primary bible is a NIV hard copy, but I cross reference with the Geneva bible online on bible gateway. I've actually grown accustomed to it and prefer it over the KJV. At first glance they seem the same, but they are do differ enough to be noticeable. Perhaps it's because the Geneva version on bible gateway has been modernised a bit. I find it more plain read vs KJV that seems a bit more formal/poetic.
An "F" was sometimes an "S" in Olde English . "Saying, where is that King of the Jews this is born? for we have seen His Star in the East and have come to worship Him".
You omitted the involvement of Theodor Beza in the translation of the Geneva Bible. Beza was otherwise famous for his homoerotic tome of love poetry entitled Juvenalia.. You are correct to point out the Calvinistic Bias of the Geneva Bible and that the KJV was a partial correction of the Geneva Bible. Because of said substantial upgrade, the King James prevailed and the Geneva Bible went out of print for 400 years. I prefer the Cleenewerck EOB Bible as it avoids Calvinistic Bias altogether.
The fact is that King James outlawed the printing of the Geneva Bible after 1599 because he hated the fact that their notes referred to tyrants and he didn't want people thinking that they could disrespect him as he knew he was a tyrant. A homosexual tyrant actually. Also he had a list of rules for translating. He would not allow the scriptures to simply be translated.
Geneva (GNV) 1599 published by Tolle Lege with modern lettering and spellings: JOHN 6:36 in the KJV -- KJV: He that believeth on the Son hath everlasting life: and he that believeth not the Son shall not see life; but the wrath of God abideth on him. And the same verse, but numbered JOHN 3:36 in the GNV 1599: GNV: He that believeth in the Son, hath everlasting life, and he that obeyeth not the Son, shall not see life, but the wrath of God abideth on him. I can't begin to guess how many times I have heard the KJV version with people saying, "Just believe in Jesus. That's all you need to do," based on John 6:36 in the KJV. The GENEVA however lets us know the vast importance of OBEYING the Son of God.
Yes, according to John 3:16 that is all one has to do...For God so loveth the world, that he hath given his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth [r]in him, should not perish, but have everlasting life.(GNV) And a few other verses to go along with that. Galatians 3:6 "Yea rather as [j]Abraham believed God, and it was imputed to him for righteousness." (GNV) Romans 1:16 "For I am not ashamed of the Gospel of Christ: [y]for it is the [z]power of God unto salvation to everyone that believeth, to the Jew first, and also to the [aa]Grecian." (GNV) Romans 3:22 "To wit, the righteousness of God by the faith of Jesus Christ, unto all, and upon all that believe." 23 For there is no difference: for all have sinned, and are deprived of the [aa]glory of God, (GNV) Romans 4:3 "To wit, the righteousness of God by the faith of Jesus Christ, unto all, and upon all that believe." (GNV) Ephesians 1:13 "In whom also ye have trusted, after that ye heard the word of truth, even the Gospel of your salvation, wherein also after that ye believed, ye were sealed with the holy Spirit of promise," (GNV) " Jesus and He alone is righteous! There is no one righteous no not one", I will let you search that scipture out for yourself. Love & prayers
All true Christians who do the Work Of the Lord are led or with other words Enlightened by the Holy Spirit. Galatians 4:6 And because ye are sons, God hath sent forth the Spirit of His Son into your hearts, crying, “Abba, Father.” And so were the Bible Translators of the KJV and the Geneva Bible. The Jesuits, in the early nineteenth century hit upon the idea of promoting to Protestants a mediaeval forgery that appeared to be an ancient copy of the Scriptures in their library (Codex Vaticanus). This was full of errors and thus little regarded, but differed so much from the Textus Receptus upon which Protestant Bibles were based that, if accepted by Protestants as authoritative, it would throw confidence in the Scriptures (outside Rome’s direct control) into confusion. To this enterprise the famous German Lutheran scholar and specialist in ancient uncial manuscripts, Constantine Tischendorf, was enlisted, as was also the brilliant Greek calligrapher,and dealer in manuscripts, Constantine Simonides. Tischendorf was invited for an audience with the Pope and became a tool of the Jesuits, eventually finding an uncial codex at St Catherine’s monastery in Sinai, which he would identify as a fourth century manuscript with similarities to Codex Vaticanus. Yet in reality Tischendorf knew that Codex Sinaiticus had recently been produced by Simonides in the old style of uncial writing. 1 Corinthians 14:33 For God is not the author of confusion, but of peace, as in all churches of the saints. Protestants today are largely unaware of their own history, and unaware of the Geneva Bible (which is textually 95% the same as the King James Version, but 50 years older than the King James Version, ( Without the Roman Catholic influences of the New Testament that the King James translators admittedly took into consideration). Nevertheless, the King James Bible turned out to be an excellent and accurate translation, and it became the most printed book in the history of the world, and the only book with one billion copies in print. In fact, for over 250 years. until the appearance of the English Revised Version of 1881-1885...the King James Version reigned without much of a rival. The NKJV is well readable for everyone understanding English. Our Lord gave us an perfect translation with the Geneva Bible and KJV. If God gave it us, we don’t need this confusion of “Modern translations” based on a fraudulent manuscript. In 1973, the New International Version (N.I.V.) was produced, which was offered as a “dynamic equivalent” translation into modern English. The N.I.V. was designed not for “word-for-word” accuracy, This is where the confusion started. With the many versions of the Bible it has lost credibility. Special it is mocked by unbelievers. James White is to blame for a large portion of it. Sinaiticus is one of the two main manuscripts which forms the basis of all modern versions of the Bible, the other main manuscript being Vaticanus. This means that the modern versions are misleading and ill inspired. After Our Lord gave us the Translation of the Bible in the common linguist there was no need for an other translation. The NKJV is a revision. Only changing some words and some Grammar no longer in use. Sinaiticus is used by every modern translation as one of their "oldest and best" manuscripts. NOW IT IS NO LONGER OLD AND BEST BUT A FORGERY FROM THE NINETEENTH CENTURY. The evidence is irrefutable. If you use a modern version, then you are relying on this nineteenth century counterfeit as your Bible. Disputed verses are for example 9 to 20 in Mark 16 The Last Twelve Verses of Mark's Gospel- James White and other Theologians claim that the last twelve verses of Mark 16 are not integral part of his Gospel. They are omitted by T [A]; not by the Syriac Appendix 94. V. Ii. www.therain.org/appendixes/app168.html JAMES WHITE AND OTHERS who would not preach from Mark 16: 9 - 20 have their hair on fire, because his favourite occult bible version ‘Sinaiticus’ is being revealed as a modern day hoax. The older translations of the Bible are The Geneva Bible and the KJV The differences between the Geneva Bible and the 1611 King James Version of the Bible are apparent. The King James Version of the Bible eliminated the marginal notes THAT HAD BEEN A POPULAR FEATURE FOR THOSE WHO USED THEM AS A STUDY GUIDE 1611 King James Version of the Bible was compiled from previous English translations and the Geneva Bible. They also used the Erasmus's translation, I’m glad I can read the Dutch Bible the first translation of the Bible from the original Hebrew, Aramaic and Greek. Commissioned by The Protestant Dutch Republic and first published in 1637 with the Marginal notes from the translators; this because some words are not so easy to translate and need to be explained. The Dutch linguist has more words than English.
My personal belief is the Bible, or at least portions of the scriptures were already coming to the western hemisphere during the later part of the Acts period. That would be many hundreds of years earlier than we’ve been told, seafaring across the ocean was possibly at that time through the south equatorial current, returning was not as feasible. It’s a lot to go into, but there were people in the western hemisphere that needed the gospel as much as those in the eastern hemisphere. They certainly didn’t have a nice pretty copy off of a printing press, but I believe they had copies just as Europe had copies that did make it to the printing press. I appreciate those who brought the Bible across the ocean in the 1600’s, but I believe we will one day meet saints who sacrificed long before that time.
Geneva bible is written in middle English, not Olde English (unintelligible to us modern English speakers) do a search for "Great vowEL shift 1066 to 1800 the two dates being the time our language was transformed/corrupted . Letter J came into existence during this period mostly replacing Y ,which in turn started replacing thee,thine with you,your (modern English) 😢
It is not written in middle english, rather it is early modern english the type of english of the time of shakespeare, milton used and this is the bible that is familiar to them. I think Sir when he said old english he refers to the archaic english we don't use anymore rather than old english the english language of anglo saxons.
Why? The more translations the better. The variety of translations have enabled us to know more about the original languages in the last 100 years or so. When scholars discovered the treasure trove of Greek papyri in Egypt a whole new world of knowledge opened up to the study of the New Testament. It was once thought that the Greek of the NT was a kind of Holy Spirit language. After this great discovery scholars and translators learned that the NT was indeed the everyday ordinary language of the common people and the marketplace. The Holy Spirit was not making up words or using grammar in a way unknown to the people of that day. This opened up a whole new world of the improvement of the original Greek. I have profited from the many translations available to the public. It has enabled me to acquire a better and deeper understanding of the word of God doctrinally. Today's translations have benefitted from this advance in linguistic knowledge over the last one hundred years or so. For example, some think that the gospel of John is a translation of an Aramaic original. A scholar named Earnest Cadwell Cowell proves that what was once thought to be Aramaisms. Greek words being used with an Aramaic grammar rather than standard Greek grammar and syntax. Colwell shows that Johns Greek grammar is actually good and standard Greek not Aramaic. The advances in linguistic knowledge and scholarship we can make a go of such study. All of the modern translations reflect the fruits of the new learning that has come to light in modern times. Just like Archaeology is always making contributions to our knowledge of the historical veracity of the infallible sacred holy scriptures. Use this to your own personal advantage for the glory of God and His truth. I do not mean to say that all modern translations are equal in accuracy and should all be used without discernment and naïve acceptance. But they can help in the ways they may bring out certain nuances of a text or phrase in the original. And I recommend and prefer the formal equivalent method of translation rather than the Dynamic equivalent as they are termed. And there is a caution in those translations which take great liberty in interpreting a passage in a loose paraphrase. Even this can aid in digging deeper into the word of God for a richer meaning and understanding of the doctrines which are according to godliness and faith in the Lord Jesus. God bless
All the new versions are not for accuracy, but money. To get a copywrite they have to be changed a percentage so do all these changes create more accuracy? And do you become the authority choosing which translation you most agree with? My husband told me the Geneva Bible had Calvinistic tendencies of which I want no part.
King James was a homosexual who burned the people who followed the Geneva Bible. He changed the Bible to reflect the power of the earthly monarchy instead of the authority we have in Christ. All other versions came from the corrupted KJV.
The late Lorraine Day, MD, Good News About God site is still up. He is buried between two fellow sodomites and it was his Jewish translators who were responsible for the 27,000 + mistranslations that Bertrand Comparet identified. I don't agree with a lot of what Day concluded, but she has good contributions.
Why would you need to compare the bibles when the bible came from Africa. Not only the bible belongs to us but the entire world. Yah in 2 Esdras 6:55 says all this have I spoken before thee, O Lord, because thou madest the world for our sakes. This is why they the gentiles removed the Apocrypha. THE TRUE ISRAELITES.
😇 *1769 KJVA: Matthew Confirms Christ's Immaculate Birth; Was By GOD'S HolyGhost and Not By Any Man: His Birth Is Prophesied In Isaiah 7:13-15, Matthew 1:18 and Again In Matthew 1:20-23; and Prophecy Fulfilled, Too.!!!&!!!* 🤔
One thing that wasn't never taught in American History. The first settlers of New England carried this Bible!! It makes sense to call the Geneva Bible the Pilgrims Bible!!!
There was one 1611 AV as well.
It is important to note the differences in this way too,
The Geneva Bible was created to be a home study bible. Used in homes where believers gathered, like the first Christians mentioned in the Bible. From the beginning the Geneva was meant to be read by individual believers.
The King James 1611 was only made in a pulpit size from what I have read with the heading:
"Appointed to be read in churches."
This is an entirely different situation. Anglican churches are a break away from the Roman Catholic. Anglicans use the Rosary and confessional booth.
The KJV saying it is appointed to be read in churches by the minister.
Implies its intention initially was not for individuals to read at home, but only in the state churches, by individuals qualified to lead an Anglican service.
@@williamjhunter5714 the study notes were wrong and bogus.
@@williamjhunter5714 Also the King wanted supremacy over the faith. King James wanted to undercut the Puritans and despised them!!! Keep in mind the Church of England was under threat by the Puritan movement.
I mean it's simple,if we gonna tell story on any topic tell the whole story
This is one of my favorite translations. It was highly influential and should get more recognition. I recently purchased a copy printed in modern typeface from Tolle Lege Press.
i bought the patriots edition used and then ordered a leatherbound version for my daughter and then ordered a new patriots edition to keep pristine so i can use my first one as a carry around bible.
I do own a GENEVA Bible, WIlliam Tyndale was my 15th Great Uncle…
Wow what a great heritage
Those "f" looking letters are called a "long S." They were a typesetting convention of the time, and followed certain rules as to when they could be used. You will also find letters like ae are often pushed together into a single letter.
Dont let any of this freak you out.
If it looks like an "f" but with a curly bottom tail and a very small cross bar, then it is simply an "s" and should be pronounced as an "s."
After an hour or so, you'll hardly notice the long s.
Same goes for the pushed together letters. They are usually just exactly what they look like.
Oh, and spelling wasn't standardized yet. So if it looks like "ftarre" thats just star, spelled a bit differently with a long s at the beginning. Just say the word out loud and you'll see that most of it is very phonetic, even if spelled strangely to our modern eyes.
Thank you thank you thank you for doing this video. I'm am so glad I found this.
I'm so glad it's been a blessing to you.
May I ask why do you have an interest in the Geneva Bible?
Far more pure and undertsanding then KJV
Greatly informative!! May the Lord our God bless you more and more
I've been reading this one occasionally on a bible version app. I really like it. KJV is my main bible, though. I think about the poor people who couldn't own a bible back in the day. We forget how blessed we are.
"back in the Day"...?
... Which day,
Do you speak of🧐
Wholeness and Balance ⚖️
This version and an the archeological bible are my go to bibles. The footnote are amazing in Geneva in respects to understanding History was repeating itself in imperialist tyrannical papacy. Catholics were from the Nicolatians. Jesus said “ I hate what they are doing!”
They were continuing to mix their pagan rituals with a little Jesus.
The Geneva also includes the apocrypha and maccabees. Macabee revolt would of been veeeeeery unpopular to King James. Those that worked on the Geneva ran for their lives. The king wanted his name and his version in every household as a counter move. He also included a hymnal to be given to all the commoners.
@@stevesandals1219Could you use a magnifying glass? I do often.
Thank you, I never heard of it until I heard others saying that words were not the same... going to get one thank you for video
Not knowing much about the different bible versions while pondering this I had a revelation from God the number 1599 popped in my head I did a search and low and behold the Geneva 1599 bible came up. The footnotes are invaluable in this version I believe the footnotes are revelations from God too
Thank you so much for sharing in such simple terms. Much love from Fiji.. God bless. 🙏💗
God bless you too. Thank you.
One of my ten ancestors who came over on the Mayflower to colonize in the New World was John Alden, the ship's cooper and carpenter. He brought his personal copy of the 1611 King James Version and his Bible is still in the family today, seen in the Alden House, now a museum in Duxbury, Massachusetts where John Alden built a house for his wife Priscilla Mullins, also a Mayflower passenger, and their family of ten.
Wow that's a wonderful legacy. Thank you for sharing
My favorite ❤️ translation
Geneva Bible Ephesians 6:12 tells who or what is running the world, and what god. Princes of darkness, world of government. Compared to you King James version, who was king james?????
Yes! Nauling it! I will tell you who he was. King James was a sinister bully bloke and a person who practised unholy counter-marital practises, to say the least. He was NEVER a follower of The Lord, and was in opposition to The Lord Christ and His Church, since he mustered all his wits and guts to persecute Puritans and all the true Christ-following Saints within all his vast kingdom of Wales and England (he was afraid to tread down the Saints in Scotland, however, since they had a way powerful lobby).Moreover, he loathfully abhorred the True Bible of the Protestant Reformation, the Geneva Bible, whose footnotes did convict this pathetic tyrant to the core. That was, actually the primary cause of arranging a new translation which was named after him, but which turned out to be nothing but plagiarism and severe affront to The Lord. If we catch a glance of conscientious and diligent scrutiny, we may definitely perceive that not only was King James a tyrant and immoral person, but he akso was a top ranking freemason who also appointed his chief freemason Francis Bacon to tak care over the venture of editing his Project. As a cogent vindication of it, there are even certain verses in this so-called 'flawless" Project which are whatever but flawless when being perused in a serious and diligent way. For example, the passage of Psalm 24;6 it reads, "This is the generation of them that seek him, of them that seek thy face, O Jacob" - so, WHOSE face should one seek? The face of Jacob, or the face of God? The Geneva renreds it correctly: "that seek thy face, THIS IS Jacob". Te difference is straightforward. Another example. Mark 16:18 "And they shall take up serpents". Are the Bible translators at loggerheads with the English language? Certainly not! The Geneva Bible says it correctly: "And they shall TAKE AWAY serpents". That is, exterminate them. Exactly accommodating what The Lord had said, "I give you power to tread on snakes and scorpions, and nothing shall by any means harm you". Also, in Acts chapter 12 they mentioned the celebration of easter , when when esther is the demon idol of fetility. Did Israel with its kings pay homages tro idols? Never! The CORRECT word is "The Passover" which stands in the Geneva Bible. One more affront towards God can be found in Genesis 22:1, where the KJV states of Abraham as "tempting" God. It sounds even like blasphemy, since God never tempts any human being and not humans. He tempts no one, the Letter of James chapter 1 in the New Testament specifies it so clearly and pertinently. On the other hand, the Geneva faithfully translates this passages this way: "God proved Abraham". God proves, but never tempts.
So, that said, any reasonable-minded human being will elicit appropriate inference and connect the dots adequately
I have the 1560 facimily hardback. And the 1599 leather version. I like them!
What's the difference between the 1560 and 1599?
@@1Corinthians15.1-4 Because of when it was published the 1560's spelling and font used is difficult to read. The 1599 has spelling like we use, and archaic words we find difficult to understand updated with modern equivalents. An example is the KJ21, which is an updated KJV.
I have a 1599 Geneva Bible on my phone. I like it. Very similar to KJV. I think it actually reads easier than the KJV in some passages of Scripture.
Geneva Bible all day
I have the 1560 Geneva Bible published by Hendrickson, Peabody, Massachusetts. It isn't modern English, it is a facsimile production of an old Bible from owned by the University of Wisconsin. The English, similar to the 1611 Authorized Version, is Elizabethan English, Shakespeare's English. It's an archaic language, but not really as foreign as one might think. With a little practice, reading the Geneva Bible or the 1611 KJV/AV becomes a joy. The notes in the Hendrickson publication can be hard to read without a magnifying glass, probably because the facsimile copy isn't the same size as the original.
I bought the 1599 Patriot Geneva Bible.
Where did you buy it? I wanna buy one.
I can read this Bible better than any other
i just ordered a 1560 Geneva bible for my son
I just ordered the 1599, and I love it so much!
You did hit the point to the core. Congratulations, Mate! Happy Passover, by the way!
Q. What was the first study Bible in English?
A . The Geneva Bible.
In England it was forbidden to translate the Bible into a vernacular language. Tyndale had to take his English translation of the New Testament to Cologne to have it printed, but his endeavor was uncovered and he was forced to halt the printing and flee. After his arrival in Worms, he had a new edition printed in 1526, in around 3,000 copies. Some copies were smuggled into England and sold there, but owning a copy of Tyndale’s New Testament still attracted the death penalty. Most copies were therefore destroyed by the authorities, who regarded the distribution of the New Testament in English as a danger to the established Church. Today, only three copies of this 1526 edition of Tyndale’s New Testament are known to survive.
William Tyndale paid for his work with his life. He went into hiding but was eventually arrested in Antwerp in 1535. At that time, he had produced a revised edition of the New Testament, published in 1534, a translation of the Pentateuch, published in 1530, and had begun his translation of the Old Testament. Tyndale was held prisoner in the castle of Vilvorde in Belgium, was convicted as a heretic and strangled and burned at the stake in October 1536. His translation, however, survived and found its way into subsequent editions of the Bible very soon after his death.
@@MariusVanWoerden correction - they had to get permission from the bishops. There's a lot of lies, propaganda and false news floating around by people to justify their hatred of others.
@@nathanjohnwade2289 Nothing to do with hatred. I have studied the Bible and Church History everyday since my 16 History does not lie, it is the stories men comes up with. I don’t like the name Calvinist. It sounds as if we follow a man. It is God Who decreed that Some would be saved and more than being saved would be lost for eternity. NOT Calvin. If your claim was true there was no preaching of the Gospel for at-least 1400 years. After the reformation [Calvinist] the Catholic church started persecution of those leaving the catholic church and many were burnt at the stake who did not give up their faith in Christ, one of them William Tyndale for translating the Bible in English. The Bible was a forbidden book and only allowed to read for the clergy in Latin even up to 1950 Catholics were not allowed to read the bible.
1 Corinthians 3:3 Are you not walking in the way of man? 4 For when one of you says, “I follow Paul,” and another, “I follow Apollos,” are you not mere men? 5 What then is Apollos? And what is Paul? They are servants through whom you believed, as the Lord has assigned to each his role.…
The main person in the reformation spend a large part of his life in a small room in the tower of the “Wartburg Castle” heavy guarded by his friends to keep him safe from the inquisition who wanted him to be Burned at the stake. All he could do is write to teach new pastors understanding the gospel. One of the most important was his Bible translation. Calvin was a free man but his health kept him from doing much but writing. You should study history. Before the Reformation there was only the Pope church. [Catholic is the Wrong name] it means “Universal Christian.” The Reformation was not the work of a man it was God’s work to free us from the Heresies of Rome.
Martin Luther was doing penance in the monastery. He was visited by Johann von Staupitz, Born: 1460 He was a Catholic theologian, university preacher, and Vicar General of the Augustinian friars in Germany, He said to Martin Luther: Martin Martin not your wounds but the Wounds of Christ. Luther later said: If it was not for Von Staupitz I would have been in Hell.
I made a website with 1000th of sermons of Martin Luther in Dutch, German and English.
@@nathanjohnwade2289and presumably they all went to Geneva on a jolly not because they were being persecuted they just enjoyed the scenery
Did the Covenanters use the 1560 0r the 1590 Geneva Bible?
Thanks for the question.
We know that the Covenanters preferred the Geneva Bible over the King James, but as to which year of printing they used I don't know. Possibly it depended on how available they were during that time.
In old English the letter 's' is written like an 'f'. Confusing I know, but that's the way it was. And there wasn't any uniformity in spelling, with there being several different spellings of the same word throughout any written work from that period.
I have the hardcover Hendrickson one. Once you get used to the typesetting and nonstandard spelling, it is very easy to read. I would prefer a little bigger print, but the Bible is already big and heavy. So, I read it at home.
The Geneva lines up more with Hebrew and Greek text than the King James
How would I go about purchasing a Geneva Bible?
They also had a different calendar then or 12 months starting in March then January
@timreynolds4443 amazon even books store barens and noble I asked on Google
I've have the 1560 edition of the Geneva Bible for a 7 yrs now. But one thing that was not mentioned in this video is the Apocrypha that is in this Bible.
Perhaps because the 1611 KJV also included the Apocrypha.
@@thomaswilliams2273 Yeah but that doesn't has anything to do with it simply because the 1560 edition of Geneva was way before the 1611 kjv. Post stuff that makes since & don't be so stupid.
@@user-so-v9o Care then to enlighten us on what makes the AP in the Geneva Bible so special? I was assuming you were talking about most modern printed Bibles omitting it. Forgive me for not guessing the proper context of your reply.
@@thomaswilliams2273 The only thing I was simply saying to you sir, was when you were on the topic of the Geneva Bible I just simply asked you why you didn't mention the Apocrypha in the 1560 edition of the Geneva Bible. What I'm saying is,it doesn't make no sense talking about the 1611 kjv Apocrypha because the Apocrypha is in the Geneva Bible you have. And your topic is on 1560 Geneva Bible!
@@ThatPreacher No
As others have pointed out,it’s the spelling and typesetting that makes the Geneva Bible a bit difficult to read. The language itself shouldn’t be a problem for anyone familiar with the KJV. Obviously some of the language is archaic, but footnotes in modern printings will cover that.
Why do you keep doing those handsigns ?
I would like to purchase a 1560 complete Bible. Which do you recommend? Which publisher?
You can check these out: www.barnesandnoble.com/w/the-geneva-bible-hendrickson-publishers/1139965611 or if you prefer a cheaper paperback: www.amazon.com/Geneva-Bible-1560-Apocrypha-Scriptures/dp/B0CZHJGWXW. It depends where you live as to the most convenient online shop to use.
Back in those days the children were taught at home and they learned to read and write using only 2 books, the Bible and a dictionary, which was also the only 2 tools used by a true lawyer in those times, based structurally off the rules and provisions of the Magna Carta or Great Charter as to the qualities of a lawyer. Thus why they were IN Law (just as a spouse of your bother or sister would be your brother or sister-IN-Law) as Lawyers or Law Sayers versed in Biblical Law, and not "at law" (they aren't your bother or sister-AT-Law!!) like the traitorous brainwashed attorneys we have today, thus why an attorney and a lawyer ARE NOT the same thing. The word Attorn in the original Webster's Dictionary, 1828 defines the word as "to turn over homage (honor) or servitude from one lord to another". Basically to steal from someone and give it to someone else. Thus why we really have NO lawyers today because they are ALL Attornors that go to BAR brainwashing school (because BAR stands for British Admiralty Registry; Regis = King, -try = Listing of Possessions, a 'Registry' originally was a Listing of the King's property, check out John Oswalt's Etymology Dictionary of the English Language, 1848; page 52 defines the word 'ship' to mean OFFICE!! This dictionary teaches how the English language was formed from the Latin and all of its roots) to learn "LEGAL" Procedure, NOT law. The "BAR" was first introduced in America in 1909 in Illinois, and thus they were the first state to begin to betray the people by training their students in the ways of Commercial Law or Maritime Water Law. "Legal" means 'the stipulation of a contract' or agreement, and thus why 'Legal' and Lawful DO NOT mean the same thing, though most people are brainwashed to think everything must be 'legal' in order for it to be Lawful!!! Thus why most people are 'sheeple' and don't even know it. Any attorney that calls them self a 'lawyer' is in all technical right an ignorant traitorous LIAR. But unfortunately its going to take most passing from this life and facing their great day of Revelation to finally see this, after its too late.
But most all of the Founding Fathers read the Geneva Bible and were referring to that version when they said the Bible was the Word of God, and hated the King James and regarded it as a blasphemy and a heresy, especially when you consider that King James was also a pedophile, its no surprise they hated him!!! This is confirmed in some of the letters they wrote back and forth to each other, especial James Madison, Thomas Jefferson, John Adams, Samuel Adams, and most of the authors of the Federalist and Anti-Federalist Papers.
Thank you for sharing this with us
Does this version contain the apocrypha?
Yes I believe it does
@@ThatPreacherthe book of Enoch is not in the Geneva Bible
@@stephenfugler I think that book is only included in the Ethiopian Bible.
What taken out put it all back in the Holy Scriptures by Apostle Pastor Gino Jennings of First Church of Our Lord Jesus Christ.😊
I like to check the marginal note of the Geneva Bible
was the nkjb used in the reprint of this copy?
I purchased an electronic Geneva bible and it was not hard to read, once you allow your brain to adjust. It isn't easy if all you read is something other than the King James bible, as the King James 1611 can also be easily read if you are familiar with the KJV. Those who use other translations for their everyday study, even the KJV (King James) is hard for many to read because it is at the twelveth grade reading level.
We have long s that look like f so the word seen is spelt feene and star ftarre East as Eaft if you keep this rule in mind you then will follow the text comfortably
When you get to Ephesians 6:12 people, you will see something totally different.
I don't like the translation of Romans 5:12 in the Geneva as opposed to the KJV, because it still supports the doctrine of Original Sin from Catholicism. That is a major heresy.
Thank you.
You're welcome!
Someone may have already commented about this but it is not pronounced eaft and Worfhip. The old way of writing a lower case s looks similar to an f but is not an f. Compare a word with an actual f with a word with an s like east and you will see a subtle difference.
Is there a Red-Letter version of the Geneva Bible?
I don't think so. The publishers tried to keep true to the original
@@faithministries62 Thank u.
Red letter bibles are a modern innovation that did not appear until 1901.
My primary bible is a NIV hard copy, but I cross reference with the Geneva bible online on bible gateway. I've actually grown accustomed to it and prefer it over the KJV. At first glance they seem the same, but they are do differ enough to be noticeable. Perhaps it's because the Geneva version on bible gateway has been modernised a bit. I find it more plain read vs KJV that seems a bit more formal/poetic.
Why they replaced the geneva bible with that king james bible???
An "F" was sometimes an "S" in Olde English . "Saying, where is that King of the Jews this is born? for we have seen His Star in the East and have come to worship Him".
I have one. I find it a bit easier to read than the KJV.
You omitted the involvement of Theodor Beza in the translation of the Geneva Bible. Beza was otherwise famous for his homoerotic tome of love poetry entitled Juvenalia.. You are correct to point out the Calvinistic Bias of the Geneva Bible and that the KJV was a partial correction of the Geneva Bible. Because of said substantial upgrade, the King James prevailed and the Geneva Bible went out of print for 400 years. I prefer the Cleenewerck EOB Bible as it avoids Calvinistic Bias altogether.
Thanks for your comments
The fact is that King James outlawed the printing of the Geneva Bible after 1599 because he hated the fact that their notes referred to tyrants and he didn't want people thinking that they could disrespect him as he knew he was a tyrant. A homosexual tyrant actually. Also he had a list of rules for translating. He would not allow the scriptures to simply be translated.
I will like the pdf
Pleas comment on footnotes for Dan. 9:26
Geneva (GNV) 1599 published by Tolle Lege with modern lettering and spellings: JOHN 6:36 in the KJV -- KJV: He that believeth on the Son hath everlasting life: and he that believeth not the Son shall not see life; but the wrath of God abideth on him. And the same verse, but numbered JOHN 3:36 in the GNV 1599: GNV: He that believeth in the Son, hath everlasting life, and he that obeyeth not the Son, shall not see life, but the wrath of God abideth on him. I can't begin to guess how many times I have heard the KJV version with people saying, "Just believe in Jesus. That's all you need to do," based on John 6:36 in the KJV. The GENEVA however lets us know the vast importance of OBEYING the Son of God.
Yes, according to John 3:16 that is all one has to do...For God so loveth the world, that he hath given his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth [r]in him, should not perish, but have everlasting life.(GNV) And a few other verses to go along with that. Galatians 3:6 "Yea rather as [j]Abraham believed God, and it was imputed to him for righteousness." (GNV) Romans 1:16 "For I am not ashamed of the Gospel of Christ: [y]for it is the [z]power of God unto salvation to everyone that believeth, to the Jew first, and also to the [aa]Grecian." (GNV) Romans 3:22 "To wit, the righteousness of God by the faith of Jesus Christ, unto all, and upon all that believe." 23 For there is no difference: for all have sinned, and are deprived of the [aa]glory of God, (GNV) Romans 4:3 "To wit, the righteousness of God by the faith of Jesus Christ, unto all, and upon all that believe." (GNV) Ephesians 1:13 "In whom also ye have trusted, after that ye heard the word of truth, even the Gospel of your salvation, wherein also after that ye believed, ye were sealed with the holy Spirit of promise," (GNV) " Jesus and He alone is righteous! There is no one righteous no not one", I will let you search that scipture out for yourself. Love & prayers
All true Christians who do the Work Of the Lord are led or with other words Enlightened by the Holy Spirit. Galatians 4:6 And because ye are sons, God hath sent forth the Spirit of His Son into your hearts, crying, “Abba, Father.” And so were the Bible Translators of the KJV and the Geneva Bible.
The Jesuits, in the early nineteenth century hit upon the idea of promoting to Protestants a mediaeval forgery that appeared to be an ancient copy of the Scriptures in their library (Codex Vaticanus). This was full of errors and thus little regarded, but differed so much from the Textus Receptus upon which Protestant Bibles were based that, if accepted by Protestants as authoritative, it would throw confidence in the Scriptures (outside Rome’s direct control) into confusion. To this enterprise the famous German Lutheran scholar and specialist in ancient uncial manuscripts, Constantine Tischendorf, was enlisted, as was also the brilliant Greek calligrapher,and dealer in manuscripts, Constantine Simonides. Tischendorf was invited for an audience with the Pope and became a tool of the Jesuits, eventually finding an uncial codex at St Catherine’s monastery in Sinai, which he would identify as a fourth century manuscript with similarities to Codex Vaticanus. Yet in reality Tischendorf knew that Codex Sinaiticus had recently been produced by Simonides in the old style of uncial writing.
1 Corinthians 14:33 For God is not the author of confusion, but of peace, as in all churches of the saints.
Protestants today are largely unaware of their own history, and unaware of the Geneva Bible (which is textually 95% the same as the King James Version, but 50 years older than the King James Version, ( Without the Roman Catholic influences of the New Testament that the King James translators admittedly took into consideration). Nevertheless, the King James Bible turned out to be an excellent and accurate translation, and it became the most printed book in the history of the world, and the only book with one billion copies in print. In fact, for over 250 years. until the appearance of the English Revised Version of 1881-1885...the King James Version reigned without much of a rival. The NKJV is well readable for everyone understanding English. Our Lord gave us an perfect translation with the Geneva Bible and KJV. If God gave it us, we don’t need this confusion of “Modern translations” based on a fraudulent manuscript.
In 1973, the New International Version (N.I.V.) was produced, which was offered as a “dynamic equivalent” translation into modern English. The N.I.V. was designed not for “word-for-word” accuracy, This is where the confusion started. With the many versions of the Bible it has lost credibility. Special it is mocked by unbelievers. James White is to blame for a large portion of it.
Sinaiticus is one of the two main manuscripts which forms the basis of all modern versions of the Bible, the other main manuscript being Vaticanus. This means that the modern versions are misleading and ill inspired.
After Our Lord gave us the Translation of the Bible in the common linguist there was no need for an other translation. The NKJV is a revision. Only changing some words and some Grammar no longer in use.
Sinaiticus is used by every modern translation as one of their "oldest and best" manuscripts. NOW IT IS NO LONGER OLD AND BEST BUT A FORGERY FROM THE NINETEENTH CENTURY. The evidence is irrefutable. If you use a modern version, then you are relying on this nineteenth century counterfeit as your Bible.
Disputed verses are for example 9 to 20 in Mark 16 The Last Twelve Verses of Mark's Gospel- James White and other Theologians claim that the last twelve verses of Mark 16 are not integral part of his Gospel. They are omitted by T [A]; not by the Syriac Appendix 94. V. Ii. www.therain.org/appendixes/app168.html
JAMES WHITE AND OTHERS who would not preach from Mark 16: 9 - 20 have their hair on fire, because his favourite occult bible version ‘Sinaiticus’ is being revealed as a modern day hoax.
The older translations of the Bible are The Geneva Bible and the KJV The differences between the Geneva Bible and the 1611 King James Version of the Bible are apparent. The King James Version of the Bible eliminated the marginal notes THAT HAD BEEN A POPULAR FEATURE FOR THOSE WHO USED THEM AS A STUDY GUIDE
1611 King James Version of the Bible was compiled from previous English translations and the Geneva Bible. They also used the Erasmus's translation,
I’m glad I can read the Dutch Bible the first translation of the Bible from the original Hebrew, Aramaic and Greek. Commissioned by The Protestant Dutch Republic and first published in 1637 with the Marginal notes from the translators; this because some words are not so easy to translate and need to be explained. The Dutch linguist has more words than English.
thank you for sharing that with us
Wow, very informative
I really want a Geneva Bible
Which would you recommend? Do you have a link? I have kjv and nkjv already. Thanks in advance
@@Rowdy3303 Amazon sells them
1599 Geneva Master Iehouah!!!!!!
Mayflower? They didnt discover a thing except for themselves.
My personal belief is the Bible, or at least portions of the scriptures were already coming to the western hemisphere during the later part of the Acts period.
That would be many hundreds of years earlier than we’ve been told, seafaring across the ocean was possibly at that time through the south equatorial current, returning was not as feasible.
It’s a lot to go into, but there were people in the western hemisphere that needed the gospel as much as those in the eastern hemisphere.
They certainly didn’t have a nice pretty copy off of a printing press, but I believe they had copies just as Europe had copies that did make it to the printing press.
I appreciate those who brought the Bible across the ocean in the 1600’s, but I believe we will one day meet saints who sacrificed long before that time.
Geneva bible is written in middle English, not Olde English (unintelligible to us modern English speakers) do a search for "Great vowEL shift 1066 to 1800 the two dates being the time our language was transformed/corrupted . Letter J came into existence during this period mostly replacing Y ,which in turn started replacing thee,thine with you,your (modern English)
😢
It is not written in middle english, rather it is early modern english the type of english of the time of shakespeare, milton used and this is the bible that is familiar to them. I think Sir when he said old english he refers to the archaic english we don't use anymore rather than old english the english language of anglo saxons.
J is Greek
It says, "We have seen his star in the east."
Your not much on actually reading The Bible, are you?
A very biased history of Tudor England.
There are simply too many versions of the bible ..
Why? The more translations the better. The variety of translations have enabled us to know more about the original languages in the last 100 years or so. When scholars discovered the treasure trove of Greek papyri in Egypt a whole new world of knowledge opened up to the study of the New Testament. It was once thought that the Greek of the NT was a kind of Holy Spirit language. After this great discovery scholars and translators learned that the NT was indeed the everyday ordinary language of the common people and the marketplace. The Holy Spirit was not making up words or using grammar in a way unknown to the people of that day. This opened up a whole new world of the improvement of the original Greek. I have profited from the many translations available to the public. It has enabled me to acquire a better and deeper understanding of the word of God doctrinally. Today's translations have benefitted from this advance in linguistic knowledge over the last one hundred years or so. For example, some think that the gospel of John is a translation of an Aramaic original. A scholar named Earnest Cadwell Cowell proves that what was once thought to be Aramaisms. Greek words being used with an Aramaic grammar rather than standard Greek grammar and syntax. Colwell shows that Johns Greek grammar is actually good and standard Greek not Aramaic. The advances in linguistic knowledge and scholarship we can make a go of such study. All of the modern translations reflect the fruits of the new learning that has come to light in modern times. Just like Archaeology is always making contributions to our knowledge of the historical veracity of the infallible sacred holy scriptures. Use this to your own personal advantage for the glory of God and His truth.
I do not mean to say that all modern translations are equal in accuracy and should all be used without discernment and naïve acceptance. But they can help in the ways they may bring out certain nuances of a text or phrase in the original. And I recommend and prefer the formal equivalent method of translation rather than the Dynamic equivalent as they are termed. And there is a caution in those translations which take great liberty in interpreting a passage in a loose paraphrase. Even this can aid in digging deeper into the word of God for a richer meaning and understanding of the doctrines which are according to godliness and faith in the Lord Jesus. God bless
All the new versions are not for accuracy, but money. To get a copywrite they have to be changed a percentage so do all these changes create more accuracy? And do you become the authority choosing which translation you most agree with? My husband told me the Geneva Bible had Calvinistic tendencies of which I want no part.
I have been reading the Geneva bible for the past 18 years. Far superior to King James 1611.
King James was a homosexual who burned the people who followed the Geneva Bible. He changed the Bible to reflect the power of the earthly monarchy instead of the authority we have in Christ. All other versions came from the corrupted KJV.
The late Lorraine Day, MD, Good News About God site is still up. He is buried between two fellow sodomites and it was his Jewish translators who were responsible for the 27,000 + mistranslations that Bertrand Comparet identified.
I don't agree with a lot of what Day concluded, but she has good contributions.
Why would you need to compare the bibles when the bible came from Africa. Not only the bible belongs to us but the entire world. Yah in 2 Esdras 6:55 says all this have I spoken before thee, O Lord, because thou madest the world for our sakes. This is why they the gentiles removed the Apocrypha. THE TRUE ISRAELITES.
Is there an English version of the Ethiopian Bible?❤
The king James has better footnote the explain that return of Jesus.
It's not an f it's an s. They wrote s differently it's not hard to read the English. It's just this guy can't. Worfhip is worship silly.
😇 *1769 KJVA: Matthew Confirms Christ's Immaculate Birth; Was By GOD'S HolyGhost and Not By Any Man: His Birth Is Prophesied In Isaiah 7:13-15, Matthew 1:18 and Again In Matthew 1:20-23; and Prophecy Fulfilled, Too.!!!&!!!* 🤔
Every Bible version and translation is man made like every other book. All man made.
John Calvin was a heretic.
The notes were junk. 1611 AV is the Bible