I've been enjoying a lot of your videos the past few days. I'm glad I found your channel, and God bless you brother. I look forward to watching many more of your videos.
When you call something a translation error without looking at the original languages I have to dismiss your statement. You do not correct a translation by looking at a different translation but by looking at the source from which they were translated. Different from the KJV does not mean wrong.
God is not double minded , we can not have two separate, different messages from God , One is true , the other is false a counterfeit , in the New translations its say that Elhanan slew Goliath. 2 Samuel 21 v 19 . That is a lie , an error, a big porky , understand its the corrupted manuscripts that produce corrupt bibles , you can trust the AKJV .
I’m a new Christian. Saved about 5 months ago and baptized last month. I started out with the NASB 2020 and I don’t know if it’s where I wasn’t saved yet or what, but that Bible made me doubt Jesus being God for so long. It was probably just me I don’t know. But this makes me wonder if it has bad stuff like the new king James does. I’ve read some of almost every translation but can’t seem to escape wanting to read the authorized version, this week I have gotten rid of most other translations. I’m not saying they’re evil but something in my spirit just wants me to read the King James Version and not the others. Anyways thank you big brother for your time in this video it was very enlightening.
The other translations for me do not convict me of my sin, in the same way that the KJV does, I have the NASB MacArthur Study Bible 1995 and it just seems like it is another best seller not the Holy Word of God.
God bless you, brother! I love brother Steve but he does have a big fault and that is that he is "KJV only". You have nothing to worry about with most modern evangelical translation. For example, brother Steve mentions Gen 12:6. Gen 12:6 says, "לְזַ֨רְעֲךָ֔" which is literally translated as "descendants" and not "seed". Why would the translators do that you might be asking? Translators did that because it doesn't really matter what Paul later says in Galatians. When a translation is trying to remain faithful to the original, they translate what the text actually says. Not translate based on what Scripture says later in the Bible.
@@RevDavidReyesWRONG!! KJV is the best and therefore should be the only one we use. There are SIGNIFICANT issues with other translations. They all attack the deity of Jesus.
Hey brother. Sometimes I struggle with this too because God is such a unique being. None is like HIM. Here are some verses to help you out and move forward on your walk and faith in Jesus Christ our Lord . "For there are three that bear record in heaven, the Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost: and these three are one. And there are three that bear witness in earth, the Spirit, and the water, and the blood: and these three agree in one." 1 John 5:7-8 KJV "In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God." John 1:1 KJV "And the Word was made flesh, and dwelt among us, (and we beheld his glory, the glory as of the only begotten of the Father,) full of grace and truth." John 1:14 KJV
@@TaskForceBWrong. Modern translations do not attack the deity of Christ. Just another lie from the KJV only cult . In fact the KJV attacks the deity of the Holy Spirit calling him an "it" four times denying his deity . Modern translations correct this gross error. Strange that the hypocrites of the KJV only cult never mention this
@Reprezent Teez They were brilliant men who knew multiple languages. The had a deep desire to have an accurate word of God in English..The history of it is amazing. Tares Among the Wheat Sequal video. The Forbidden Book video RUclips. God was truly with them. Many lost their lives to bring the word of God to us. Ask the Lord to show you.
+@@judyswiderski2682 Again you lie . . . NOT one person lost their life for the KJB - BUT it was used to justify the killing of 300,000 Irish - The lived lost for the BIBLE were LONG before the emasculated and state-sponsored KJB corrupted by the English Catholic church. The Geneva which the KJB was designed to remove from England - was an HONEST, PROTESTANT translation even IF its underlying texts were corrupted by Erasmus. "They were brilliant men who knew multiple languages. " They were second rate linguists who knew a number of languages - Greek was NOT the primary language of any of them. YES some were Brilliant- by HALF of them wanted to rejoin the catholic church, few were saved - and ONE of the Christian on the committees refuse to allow the completed Bible into His pulpit. Such was his animosity to the finished work. The greatest scholar of Hebrew in England MOCKED their work as amateurish. GOD SAVE the KING appears in NO other Bible ever-0 and NEVER in any Hebrew text - BUT its in the KJB. "The had a deep desire to have an accurate word of God in English..The history of it is amazing. " Rubbish - The ONLY reason was to remove the Geneva Bible which in a marginal note claiming IF the KING was a bum - remove him. James was NOT just a bum - he was a raging sodomite who justified his lovers by using Christ and John as his example. "Tares Among the Wheat Sequal video. The Forbidden Book video RUclips. " CULTISH trash, fantasy and falsehoods - the Smith video by the MORMONS is more factual. "God was truly with them." NOT the KJB editors - they paid NO heed to honesty or reliability - BUT what pleased the KING. " Many lost their lives to bring the word of God to us. " NOT ONE had any relationship to the KJB - NOT ONE. IT was a state sponsored Bible - NO harm came from it - EXCEPT to the Irish - BUT people WERE persecuted for owning a Geneva - "WHY do you lie so much? Ask the Lord to show you." I have - the KJB is the second poorest translation in existence. A millstone about the neck of the Christian church. A cultic IDOL for the deceived.
@@judyswiderski2682 What Anglican KJV translators lost their lives? After all no translation can ever be perfect. Especially as the language is so archaic that the KJV belongs in a museum. Thank God for better modern translations.
@@martinbaker7032 They were Anglican and Puritan. The Forbidden Book video is old but fllled with information. But if you insist on an obvious false Jesus because you do not have to put effort into reading it, then that is your choice.
@@judyswiderski2682 What false Jesus are you talking about? The false Jesus of the Mormons? Or Christian Scientists? Or Jehovah Witnesses? All these cults who deny the deity of Christ, used the KJV to promote these false Jesus's. The Jesus who is my saviour and lord, is Almighty God second person of the trinity. Born of a virgin, conceived by the Holy Spirit the third person of the trinity. Without sin, who became sin for me. Crucified the perfect sacrifice, so there is no more sacrifice for sin, because Jesus paid it all. Raised to life and alive forevermore, the name above all names. Every knee shall bow, and ever tongue will confess that he is Lord. The Jesus who has sent the Holy Spirit, to lead us into all truth. The Spirit himself, not itself as the KJV mistranslate denying his deity. The Holy Spirit who witnesses to my spirit that I am a child of God,? Is that the Jesus that you are talking about? Where in scripture does it say I must read the KJV? Please show me the scripture. I know you can't, because there isn't one. You can rant and rave all you like, but you can't back up your delusions with scripture. In fact what you are doing is promoting another gospel, as a result you are promoting another Jesus. So according to the authority of the word of God, that is witchcraft. Cannot wait to read your next fantasy. But no doubt Satan as deceived you. Otherwise would not continue to promote the the idolatrous blasphemous cult of KJV onlyism. You are not Bible believer, but a KJV only hypocrite.
the nkjv relies on the alexandrian text you need to find the Cambridge pure Edition King James Bible that goes off the antioch text , the alexandrian school is the one that stoned Steven in acts 8. HELLO? ANYBODY HOME? HUH?
@@overcomer749 Why would God want us to suffer ? He designed and manufactured us very carefully. If God built a computer, he would not want it to crash !
@@tedgrant2John 15: 20 “Remember the word that I said to you, ‘A servant is not greater than his master.’ If they persecuted Me, they will also persecute you. If they kept My word, they will keep yours also. It’s not because God wants us to suffer for the sake of it. This world system is anti-God, according to James 4: 4 - Adulterers and adulteresses! Do you not know that friendship with the world is enmity with God? Whoever therefore wants to be a friend of the world makes himself an enemy of God. This also works the other way around, when we follows Gods ways we’re turning away from the worlds system, and thus we become their enemies. This is why persecution is guaranteed to anyone who genuinely follows God, according to 2Timothy 3: 12 - Yes, and all who desire to live godly in Christ Jesus will suffer persecution. you have to be willing to pay a price to follow the Lord of All. It’s worth it. Remember the words of Jesus in Luke 14:27 “And whoever does not bear his cross and come after Me cannot be My disciple. 28 “For which of you, intending to build a tower, does not sit down first and count the cost, whether he has enough to finish it- 29 “lest, after he has laid the foundation, and is not able to finish, all who see it begin to mock him, 30 “saying, ‘This man began to build and was not able to finish.’ 31 “Or what king, going to make war against another king, does not sit down first and consider whether he is able with ten thousand to meet him who comes against him with twenty thousand? 32 “Or else, while the other is still a great way off, he sends a delegation and asks conditions of peace. 33 “So likewise, whoever of you does not forsake all that he has cannot be My disciple.”
the nkjv relies on the alexandrian text you need to find the Cambridge pure Edition King James Bible that goes off the antioch text , the alexandrian school is the one that stoned Steven in acts 8. HELLO? ANYBODY HOME? HUH?
In Genesis 12:6 the word (Heb. אֵלוֹן , elon) means a terebinth tree bearing a certain kind of nut, which is why other translations use “oak”. In 12:7, the word (Heb. זֶרַע, zera) does mean seed, and the closer fulfillment of the promise was realized in Abram’s descendants in Israel. The point that Paul makes to the Galatians is that the promise is fully realized in Christ since He is the true Seed, and the promises of the covenant were made “to” the Seed but the descendants were kept to the same promises under the Law until the Seed would come. Paul even says to this end, “And if ye be Christ's, then are ye Abraham's seed, and heirs according to the promise.” (Galatians 3:29), so the fact that “seed” is a singular word is not a hard and fast rule for all reading but is used to demonstrate that the promise is now only valid in Christ.
cant believe amidst all the REAL problems facing the church in this time with false teachers and teachings we are even discussing these elementary topics, translational issues,,really? do you worship GOD or the translation? how many translations before 1611 and how many after? and you are a pastor? the comment by "328am" had more wisdom in 10 seconds than your 21:45 video.
Jesus talked about jots, tittles, and His Word would not pass away. He said we would live by every Word of God. God is revealed to us by His Word. If it’s important to God it should be important to us.
Look at this one ... (NKJV) A gracious woman retains honor, But ruthless men retain riches. - Proverbs 11:16 vs (KJV)A gracious woman retaineth honour: and strong men retain riches. - Proverbs 11:16
For the message of the cross is foolishness to thoses who are "being saved" it is the power of God. 1 Corinthians 1:18 NKJV For the preaching of the cross is to them that perish foolishness but unto us "which are saved" it is the power of God. 1 Corinthians 1:18 KJV 1 Corinthians 1:18 "being saved" sounds like a future event while "which are saved" sounds like it present. I just have to compare KJV with the NKJV and take the bible study notes from my NLT and NKJV and place it too my KJV. The Earlier Church Reformation wouldn't accept the idea of "being saved" we need to focus on the meaning of the cross and we can begin to have good discernment.
The Acts 2:37 miss translation hold no water. Let can absolutely be a command. We say that all the time in that context. "Let it happen" or " Let it be as you you said." It's a statement of fact that can easily be taken as a command Also, the supposed Galatians miss translation seed means family or liniage or decedents. They are all the same thing. Iit seems like your trying to divide and grind your own acts. I understand you have your own favorite translation as do I, however you are suggesting you know more about the nuances of translating then the translators themselve. Better then professional linguistics. That kind of an arrogant claim. Just saying.
Lord bless you and may the doctrin we preach no matter what Bible we trust, be true towards the teachings of Jesus Christ and the Apostles doctrine. Repentance Baptism in Jesus name and in the infilling of the Holy Spirit and that we aught to live separated Holy, living in obedience to the gospel and make disciples as this is the great commission.
Well the point is, Jeff Moore, that it does "matter what Bible in which [an individual] trust[s]"! It's got to be correct on the page for it to make the heart that embraces what is on the page correct! Except for a merciful intervention of Christ Jesus the Almighty to speak truths by His Spirit into the heart that the necessary realization can be had of what is truth from what is error, to use a supposed "translation" or "version" that is flawed is to make one's self hopelessly flawed in thinking & in practice. You are suggesting that a person can use a "Bible" that does not really faithfully represent what were the actual messages of the Almighty by terminology & phraseology that is actually equivalent to the original languages & yet still come away with correct information & doctrine & be alright, but this is simply not true! There have been over the years many Oneness Apostolic Pentecostals who were not content with delving sufficiently into the KJV to go beyond any linguistically, hermeneutically & ideologically challenging particular that is in the KJV to ascertain & gain what was exactly intended but rathered to embrace other so-called "versions" who have made spiritual shipwreck, them no longer believing much or any of the Scriptural fundamentals of Oneness Apostolic Pentecostalism, of the Church founded by Christ Jesus the Almighty.
888,888_ fiery_mercaba i agree with you, it does matter. My comment was not implying use whatever bible it was a personal coment in regards to his trust in the kjv and mine in the nkjv. While we hold the exact same doctrinal teaching. Not all bibles are the same alot of them are garbage in my opinion.
Let me put it this way, Jeff Moore. The hierarchy of trust ought to be Christ Jesus the Almighty, above all others, His Spirit, "the Spirit of truth," being present with those who have become His own to empower & to guide. He helps those who trust in Him & are very much inclined to His voice & wanting to differentiate what is truth from what is false, myth, fabrication, misunderstanding, fiction. As we must have a genuine written down representation of His Word in which we have to have a considerable degree of trust that it is a presenter of His Word, this need being obvious by His own indication of this by having said things like, "Have ye never read in the Scriptures....?", or, "It is written....", & so on, but also our humanity having limitations that make the demand for a physical sourcebook to which to refer for tenets, confirmations, instructions, & guidance, we are individually faced with the challenge of ascertaining which of all the cornucopia of "Bibles" is really the Genuine Representation of His Intended Communications, which is His Book by virtue of having accurately captured the original communications with the graphemic symbolizations of our own mother tongue. This is an extremely important matter & He has long had me involved in determining what is what in this matter, even from I was a little boy. I personally recognize it as an exceedingly important matter & it is in this realization & in the healthy fear of Him that I discovered the KJV as the most accurate written representative of His Original Communications. It has been by seeing the manifestation in my own life of what numerous things that are documented in the KJV & with obvious confirmation by & blessings of His Spirit that have not only convinced me that I need look no further than the KJV Bible for that which is attested to as being His Word but, by being also familiar with the NKJV, the NIV, & a few other "versions" that I looked into far less yet enough to know their errors, to dismiss & avoid the other "versions", except in the rare cases wherein referencing them a witness of the Lord can lead a person to the truths of the Lord by the smattering of accuracies in them &, ultimately, to the KJV, the sourcebook that has not only a smattering of accuracies but the same accuracies & more accuracies than are in the other "versions." In short, I would phrase it this way, for this particular situation, you, this pastor, me, & everyone ought to put our individual trust in the Spirit of truth, namely Christ Jesus' Spirit, & rely on Him to infuse us with knowledge, wisdom, & understanding FOR HIS GLORY, to help us to discern truth from falsehood FOR HIS GLORY. Ideally then will come a confirnation that the KJV is indeed good enough English translation out of the original languages for us English speakers &, also, for those looking to use a reliable English translation to inform their translation into a foreign language. It is not that we should ever "trust in" the KJV to the extent that we trust in the Lord Almighty Himself, but we surely can count it as reliable enough for the duties of reading, studying, memorization, meditation, & practice that we are called unto as Christians. Additionally, we are to not be so discontent or craving more "versions" as if the majority of definitely conflicting & confusing sources -- conflicting & confusing as the devil would desire it to be -- is going to secure for us more truth than the Lord Almighty can lead us to in & by the KJV Bible. To not heed this warning & do otherwise is for one to certainly subject himself or herself to spiritual food poisoning! One of my favorite passages of Scripture is this that Paul wrote to the Thessalonian saints by the unction of the Spirit: "Prove all things; hold fast that which is good." (Quoted from memory, a thing that, incidentally, becomes far more difficult for those who delve into various "versions.)
+@@fiery.mercaba NO Bible in existence is as corrupt as the KJB save the NWT - and your assertion of having to have a reliable text while accurate is deceptive - for you present the KJB as the ONLY accurate one when in fact it is the least accurate and reliable Bible today. Its corruption began in its assembly by Erasmus of his 6 partial and corrupted texts - and never improved with the emendations of Beza and Stephanus. Given that corruption of the misnamed TR - and the political demands of the sodomite King James - HOW could it be a reliable text without a great miracle - and HOW could that miracle be from GOD? For IF God inspired the KJB - then no one before 1611 had an inspired Bible - certainly NOT the early church whose Bibles contradict the KJB - and THEY taught that their Bible was given under inspiration. I prefer to follow the evidence that the Bible was inspired - and then copied - being corrupted over the centuries in that process - The job of the Biblical scholar today is to get as close to the originals as possible - and that does NOT include 6 partial texts from th3 1200's. " . . . them no longer believing much or any of the Scriptural fundamentals of Oneness Apostolic Pentecostalism, of the Church founded by Christ Jesus the Almighty." Although I taught that for years - they is NO evidence to support it - nowhere nohow. Maybe , even with your massive revelations, spiritual superiority and profound ego - you MIGHT be wrong?
Read your Authorized Version. The NKJV demotes Jesus. In John 1:3 they say all things were made through him. In the Authorized Version. All things were made by him. .The definition of God is Creator Being.
Knowing that the Spirit of Truth will lead us into all truth, i submit this to you: Modern bibles continually challenge God asking, Did God say? Come on, really? God said He preserved His word. Psalm 12:6-7. Most modern bibles do not. In other words they are not admitting that God has a standard, His inspired word. His word is quick (alive) and quickens (gives life). His word is eternal. Most have at least one out and out lie. NKJB lies in Exodus 6:3. They began to call on the name of the Lord in Genesis 4:26. Others quote Jesus telling his brothers, i am not going to the feast. John 7:8. (Is he saying he is going to break the law of Moses?) He waits and then goes. Liar! BLASPHEMY . Jesus simply said, not going now, not yet. He waits and then goes. No problem, no lie. And blatantly they mock Jesus and unashamedly, constantly, with each change ask, Did God say? Did God say Mark 11:26? Absolutely. It is an essential part of our walk with God. A verse that makes us tremble was added????? Did God say? Acts 15:34? It shows God's divine providence. Silas was there when Paul needed him for a journey. Obviously Silas remained there. BRAZENLY, they change or remove a word that gives the believers true power! Matthew 12:31 and Mark 9:29! Some spiritual warfare needs prayer and fasting! Did God say eleven (11) times in the New Testament the word damnation, eternal burning? Yes. But not in theirs! Did God say? Did God give three witnesses to that truth? Mark 9:44, 46, 48. They however only have v48. The other two they ask, Did God say? This is important because we need to know the truth and those who preach Annialism, we cease to exist, are easily proven wrong with these verses. Jesus is God and Jesus is Man. Hebrews supports this with four verses, 3:3, 7:24, 8:3 and 10:12: "But this man, after he had offered one sacrifice for sin for ever, sat down at rhe right hand of God; v10:12. They do not use the clarifying words 'this man' at all. Again, Did God say? Every change they make is an insult to God and His word. God said He would curse those who add to or take from His word. Revelation 22:18-19. In the Old Testament those who honored a false prophet received the reward of that prophet. So the Alexandrian translators, the bible societies the publishers, the promoters, sellers and those who teach from them (showing those ear tickling bibles as God's word) or honor them will be held responsible. If done ignorantly, repent. God will not be mocked. This happened when the inspired Antioch manuscripts called the Textus Receptus were replaced by the Alexandrian manuscripts called the Codex B or the Vaticanus from the Vatican basement, and the Sianiticus from a monestary. They do not agree with each other and the latter has about 30 changes per page. Obviously inspired by their spiritual father who brings conflict, frustration, despair and DOUBT. King James Bible online Helpful tool: Noah Webster 1828 Dictionary online: Look up: REPENT, REGENERATION, BELIEVE, FAITH, REDEMPTION, PERFECT, CONVERSATION, PREVENT, PROPITIATION etc. Suppliers: Churchkjb.com Localchurchbiblepublishers.com Sources: Adullum Films Documentary -Tares Among the Wheat video Books: The Revision Revised and The Last Twelve Verses of Mark, both by William Burgon. Dean Burgon lived during the time of Wescott and Hort. Book: Look What's Missing by David Daniels Chick.com. If interested an old video called The Forbidden Book video. It has some American History also.
My brother. I love most of your bible review videos. I actually enjoy the way you present them. But in this video, you have seriously perplexed me. I followed along with each scripture you brought up. Upon looking up the definitions in the original Greek and Hebrew, your translations are based on an English language understanding and far from their true definitions. You may want to look deeper before you aim at disqualifying other translations. I was raised on the KJV and still love it to this day. But I also enjoy the NKJV and the HCSB. Not criticizing you brother, just pointing out my observations. OneLove...
How do you know your source, what you are calling the "original Hebrew and Greek", is correct? How do you come to the conclusion it is original or better than the English words in the KJB translated from H/G by it's translators? How does this come about? Is it only the KJV that is questioned, but not the H/G sources of the 19th Century Textual Critics?
+@@brianhaley4471 When has a translation EVER been better than its source? We have the Dead Sea Scrolls that were untouched for 2000 years - we have texts of the NT from 400 AD and fragments from the first century - BOTH skipping close to 1500 years of hand copying which ALWAYS leads to errors and corruptions. WHY would you have more faith in a known-to-be corrupt translation which contained 3000 errors when introduces and after 10 revisions STILL has a couple hundred, than the very ancient texts close to and maybe even copies OF, the originals? "How do you know your source, what you are calling the "original Hebrew and Greek", is correct?" Its irrational to expect the KJB to be translated "better" than the close copies of the originals - we KNOW that it came from 6 partial catholic Greek texts - assembled by a Catholic theologian, with insertions from the Vulgate and Vaticanus - at the request of a bishop - that the finished texts was dedicated by Erasmus to Pope Leo X - and approved for use in the Catholic church - and then when translated into English - there were amendments opinions and other insertions - all based on those same corrupted 6 catholic Greek texts - - just HOW could you assume that process to be more reliable than finding complete texts from antiquity? "How do you come to the conclusion it is original or better than the English words in the KJB translated from H/G by it's translators? " What possible motive could you have to suggest that the translation is superior to the originals? WE know the KJB is corrupted - it failed for political reasons to even stay true to the misnamed "TR" - NOT that that was a reliable text to go from. TODAY we have 5000 ancient texts - all more accurate than the texts from which the KJ was translated. OTHER than a second divine revelation (which would OBVIOUSLY contradict the first ) of the scriptures - the issue is one of fantasy and NOT fact. God isn't capricious - he was NOT confused when he gave the NT - BUT you are confused IF you think any man-made TRANSLATION is inspired - particularly the KJ corruption. Make an argument for the Geneva and I MIGHT meet you halfway - an HONEST translation from corrupt sources surely beats a DISHONEST translation from corrupt sources. The sources of the Textual scholars are constantly being questioned and have been for centuries. They are being questioned anew today with Dan Wallace's ambitious program to digitize every fragment known - analyzing each and fitting them to their date and textual sources. They stand up under scrutiny - the KJ fails at every examination. NO such examination of the KJ is considered by its cultist followers. They accept it by (blind, irrational ) faith. "How does this come about? Is it only the KJV that is questioned, but not the H/G sources of the 19th Century Textual Critics? " ONLY because the KJB has proven to be corrupt - and of very late date - while the H/G sources are very close to the originals whether Greek OR Hebrew - and in any game of telephone, the message is ONLY accurate for the first few repetitions. Furthermore, compared to the 6 underlying texts - none complete - of the KJB - which did NOT agree with each other - there are 5000+ Greek fragments - some 15000 or more in total - going back within lifetimes of the apostles and heir immediate disciples - from which a majority opinion can be formed.
+@@kingston163 "@Paul Robinson You talk about scripture and the influence of man upon it to the total exclusion of the role of God power and influence. " NOT at all - you utterly ignore that GOD allowed mankind to corrupt BOTH the perfect world He created and the perfect Word He gave - IF GOD chose to allow mankind to corrupt one, why not the other? IF God "preserved" His word and protected it perfectly for 1500 years, how do you justify the printing errors - some say 22,000 - in this? Are the translators protected but NOT the printers? LOGIC has never been the friend of the KJO cultist - neither has history, textual evaluations, scholarship and common sense. The issue is that you make that kind of irrational statement without any reference at all to reality - you make a Pharisaical assumption that YOU understand this fantastical God you have created in your own mind - totally apart from reality. YOU utterly ignore the REALITY that the KJB has major variations from the early texts - you utterly ignore that GOD allowed the Politically-dependent translators to first insert 14 extraneous books, then remove them - HOW can anything be "perfect" when bits are added and removed at the will of man? What possible justification can you even propose for GOD having a hand in the KJB but no other? WHY do you fight so hard against assembling the Bible originally given to the New Testament Church, rather than one with 1500 years of copying errors, additions opinions and politics? "For instance, you write, "Its irrational to expect the KJB to be translated "better" than the close copies of the originals" says who you." Says any intelligent person. WE now have Bibles from the 4th century - one would logically expect they - along with thousands of others from antiquity would be more accurate than 6 partial copies from the 13th century that had been filtered through Catholicism and copied poorly. " Too difficult for an ALL powerful God as well?" That's an utterly absurd statement. Its also a logic trap - for IF God could guide an accurate translation from corrupted texts - why then could He not guide an accurate translation from the more ancient more accurate texts? WHY could he not protect the printers as well? Is God's power and influence limited? YOU seem to make that case. God ONLY had enough power to protect the translation that turned out to be terribly corrupt - but could NOT protect the printers from admonishing "Thou Shalt Commit Adultery" in the infamous adulterers Bible? IF God could guide a group of political churchmen required to follow the rules set down by a sodomite king, using corrupted sources - by what stretch of illogic could God not far better guide a number of Godly and committed men whose ONLY purpose in translation is to bring honor an glory to God, to make the Scripture more accurate and make it plain and in common comprehensible language? YOU KJO cultist talk in circles - you never offer any evidence for your mythology - its all blind irrational and illiterate faith in something GOD never did - man-made dogma - guide corrupt political churchmen to produce a "perfect" Bible - TRULY, your faith is a parallel to the Mormon faith. It flies in the face of evidence and reality. WHY could God NOT guide the translators of the NIV, the EDB, etc? far more easily than the KJB? We KNOW their motives were purer, their sources more accurate and their understanding of the language far superior. NO politics were involved in those accurate translations. "Frankly you talk crap to mislead young Christians just as lucifer would like." And again you deliberately LIE to protect your cult. Lucifer does NOT want the Bible to be understandable, comprehensible, and effective. BY what twisting of Logic could the devil WANT a better, more easily read, more accurate, Bible to be made available? Satan uses religious tradition in an attempt to thwart God's purposes - it happened at Calvary, it happened in a vain attempt to stop the early church, it happens in vain when God produces accurate modern Bibles - it is your only argument against modern accurate Bibles - Man's vain traditions are always at odds with God's purposes. YOU utterly ignore the REALITY that going back to the most accurate texts available from the early church cannot be considered following the devil's lead - the blind and irrational faith you show in a demonstrably corrupted Bible certainly smacks of demonic influence to me. YOU ignore the fact that GOD could NOT possibly have inspired BOTH the Bibles if the early Church AND the KJB - for they have areas of contradiction - do NOT think it more likely tha GOD blessed the early church and inspired THEIR Bibles? WHY would you think that GOD preferred a Bible that has several hundred errors STILL after 10 or so revisions - 3000 at a minimum at its released - some say 22000? This is the Best God's guidance can produce? Sorry, my deceived friend - that's NOT My GOD. IF My God inspired a Bible translation, it would be perfect - free from man-made opinion and insertions - Like 1 John 5:7 - which if NO OTHER evidence were available by itself, proved an IMPERFECT and UNinspired KJB
+@@kingston163 Lets think about who's talking crap - YOU want to introduce young Christians to a new faith that requires learning a new language? WWJD? He spoke in plain and simple street language - and YOU put a millstone around their neck. Christianity should NOT require a university course in Archaic English. Christianity should NOT be expecting those looking for truth to read a corruptible and in accurate Bible . YOUR downfall as a "faith plus Works" cult is that very often people actually investigate the false claims you make about your corrupt Bible and find it's inaccurate and poorly translated - Then their faith is shipwrecked - IT is impossible for any new convert to be led astray by reading ANY modern and accurate Bible - and you have never even attempted to make a case for that. The KJB should be outlawed by convention in modern Christian churches - IF you want to keep it as an example of archaic textual chaos - GO for it - BUT stop putting millstones around the necks of new believers. FACT!! "Frankly you talk crap to mislead young Christians just as lucifer would like."
Guys, I think we waste time splitting hair over this topic. The Lord God Almighty does not speak to me in Elizabethan English. The time we waste is better served with our preparing ourselves for the day that is to come. We fight amongst ourselves when our enemy is the Satan. I am a conservative Christian but feel we do our God disservice with our infighting.
Thank you for making great videos. I have a hard time understanding the King James I can read it but I barely understand anything I just read, Is every other translation bad?
There’s nothing wrong with the New King James. They use the exact same Textus Receptus as the basis. This video doesn’t explain anything without going back to the Textus Receptus and comparing. You can trust the NKJV, and for you, you’d get more out of it as it is modern english. There’s thousands of renown scholars who will tell you this, but this is the position of the King James only crowd. “No” Isn’t a helpful answer but that’s all he can give because he’s King James only but doesn’t want to plainly come out and say this. There’s problems with being a King James onlyist. Think about this. If the Textus Receptus is in Greek, and the King James is translated in english, FROM the Textus Receptus, then how is it reasonable to compare the New King James directly to the King James, regarding the King James as the basis of the original text when in fact it isn’t?
I have a hard time interpreting and understanding the original KJV Bible. So I got a NKJV, and I have a much easier time understanding it because of the more modern language it uses. What modern day language Bible would you recommend that would be better than the NKJV?
James, would both accurate in saying : "God will provide himself a lamb for a burnt offering" or " God will provide for himself the lamb for a burnt offering"
The NKJV denotes Jesus. In John 1:3, all things were made through Him. He cannot be God by definition. God is the Creator Being. NKJV counterfeit. NKJV a deadly translation. NKJV a fraud.
Thanks for this video. The problem I have is I don't speak 17th century English, I barely speak 21 century English. How do I improve my comprehension of the KJV? I've heard it said that if you don't understand the KJV you aren't saved. Would you agree with that? What commentary do you recommend?
I don't speak 17th century English either... a lot of the words in the later editions of the KJV are normal letters and it makes sense. A lot of them are just words added together like whosoever... also, there are still going to be unknown words in the other Bibles too that you will have to look up and research. Second, we go learn new words and stuff in school/work... so, it should be more worthy to understand the Bible also in context... God bless :)
I would encourage anyone here to look up any of the words in question in a trustworthy lexicon like the BDAG or the BDB. It will be quite alarming to see just how accurate the NKJV actually is.
I wonder if he believes Psalm 16:1 “preserve” & Psalm 16:11 “evermore” is the promise of the KJV 1611 edition. Yet majority of KJV are 1769. Matter fact a real 1611 Psalm 16:1 starts with “Michtam”.
@@Jonathan_Gen15.6 I know this guy is not kjv only, but I hate hearing straw man arguments like this. It's very misleading. What people need to realize is that in Bibliology (what the Bible says about the Bible), the Scriptures are 100% silent on translation & textual matters. Preservation is a doctrine and is the very reason why we have the Bible today while translation is the work of man and the reason why the Bible has yet to be printed in every language...
@@328amwhy you be hating on the kjv I love it I’m not a kjvo I just love the translation and think the poetic language is buetiful but if you read the nkjv your still a brother in Christ
@@xxXQUICKXxx Hating? You couldn't be more wrong. I use the kjv everyday and it's what I preach from every week. I just find videos like this to be VERY misleading and kjv onlyism to cause great schism in the body of Christ.
As a senior I grew up with the KJV. Your comments are very interesting but you have not convinced me that the NKJV is a bad translation. I actually use a side by side KJV NKJV. Makes my Bible study much more fruitful. Thanks be to God!
Ok is it ok to go against GODS will can u show me anywhere in the old king James thats says it ok to change the word of GOD or any of ur knock off counterfeits because they all come from the old king James they have just been perverted by man none of them same its ok to change the word of GOD but they do say DO NOT ADD TO OR TAKE AWAY NOT ONE FOLI r u ok with that or do u obey GODS word HIS true word keep it true and obey GODS word I can show u many scripture that say do not change these words not one foli what part of that do u not understand?
the nkjv relies on the alexandrian text you need to find the Cambridge pure Edition King James Bible that goes off the antioch text , the alexandrian school is the one that stoned Steven in acts 8. HELLO? ANYBODY HOME? HUH?
Brother, do you have a compilation of these things? I just got the revised ( noncopyrighted) NKJV with the 84/85 text and wan to compare that with the 1982 and KJV . Ty.
Even the ESV in Acts 2:38 says "repent and be baptized" it does not say "repent and let everyone be baptized" as it says in the New King James Version.
I think what is lacking is an understanding of modern English. To me, for instance, condemnation & judgement in these contexts, both end in damnation are all equivalent. It sounds more like individual taste than surgical precision issues, especially given the lack of surgical precision in English. I think the only completely accurate Holy Bible are the original texts because those highly dense languages are actually so surgically precise, changing a letter in THOSE languages means different things. As long as you are not reading from the Message or other such paradies, I'm not really going to call a foul. CSB was the first version I read all the way through, the ESV followed, & I'm getting ready to do a side-by-side of the NKJV with them. After that, I'm going to do a side-by-side of the KJV, saving that one for last because of the issue I have with Middle English (blame Shakespeare trauma from homeschool lit). But what I'm hearing is more emotional than textual differences. Can anyone help me see where there is significant variance, please? I'm just not hearing it anywhere except the changes in vocal tone & preferences.
John 1:3 NKJV turns Jesus into a tool. “All things were made through Him, and without Him nothing was made that was made.” John 1:3 NKJV “All things were made by him; and without him was not any thing made that was made.” John 1:3 KJV
The word translated “damned, damnation”, etc. (Strong’s 2917, κρίμα ) is also translated “judgment” and “condemnation” in other verses of the KJV. You’re mocking the NKJV for saying “condemnation” when the KJV translators used the same term in many places. To surmise that the KJV translators were the final authority for whether or not the same word MEANT a particular action was condemned by the Lord in one place or that it unquestionably warranted eternity in Hell in another is a very peculiar approach to exegesis.
@Van Guard Are you sure about that ? The Geneva calls Jesus " it " John 1:3-4 1599 Geneva Bible (GNV) 3 All things were made by it, and without it was made nothing that was made. 4 In it was life, and that life was the light of men.
Tim Campbell That’s absolutely crazy but although I prefer the KJV Bible over other translations, the KJV at times calls Holy Spirit an it which doesn’t sound right and I’m honestly not sure why they translated this way. In this particular matter when I’ve read the NASB they do a better job at exalting the deity of Holy Spirit by not referring to Holy Spirit as an it but to He, Him or Himself. Perhaps brother Waldron can explain why this is. Here are just a few verses: John 1:32 And John bare record, saying, I saw the Spirit descending from heaven like a dove, and [it] abode upon him. Rom 8:16 The Spirit [itself] beareth witness with our spirit, that we are the children of God: Romans 8:26 Likewise the Spirit also helpeth our infirmities: for we know not what we should pray for as we ought: but the Spirit [itself] maketh intercession for us with groanings which cannot be uttered. 1 Peter 1:11 Searching what, or what manner of time the Spirit of Christ which was in them did signify, when [it] testified beforehand the sufferings of Christ, and the glory that should follow.
There is a very high probably that someone who knows what "judgement" is, also knows what "damnation" is. I dont understand why the NKJV changes words that are easily understandable. And removes or adds words to verses that are also easily understandable. Many times, like you showed, what they do is change the meaning instead. I bought two, a medium sized one, and a smaller one, and Im starting to regret not just getting the KJV. But, at the same time, now I know about this, and it led me to watch this video, which taught me more.
Thanks pastor for shedding light on the differences between those two versions of the Bible . Can there be a translation that has updated English and yet retains the accuracy of the kjv ?
@@NewLifeOfAlbanyGa You cannot use it like that to see how many errors the other translation had. You must compare it to the original manuscripts/languages, then you will notice that the kjv has many errors, more than other translations.
@@BloodBoughtMinistries Which ms Manuscripts are you referring to? If you are using the Hrbrew Greek Alexandrian manuscripts, therecwould be many errors. However they do not agree with each other and one does not agree with itself.
@@BloodBoughtMinistries Also, the proof is in the pudding. The NKJV denotes Jesus. John 1:3, all things were made through him. He cannot by definition be God,, the Crestor Being. NKJV counterfeit. NKJV a deadly translation. NKJV a fraud..
The KJV. Ye is plural and thee and thou are singular in the KJV. It is reflecting singular and plural from Hebrew and Greek and has nothing to do with Elizabethan English. English is cohered by the KJV and Shakespeare. It’s modern English, which began in 1526 with Tyndales Bible.
The problem alot of Baptists have with other Texus Receptus bibles is they thought they new their bible, til they read a more accurate one, and now they feel like they have to study all over again
Most of the time, the verses they actually do preach on with the other versions is the still the same as the KJV just with modern langauge and it didnt affect the doctrine.
At the beginning, the speaker makes a huge error in stating that water baptism is being born of water. The water that Peter spoke of in Acts 2:38 is the washing of water by the word of God. Note the verses below. Ephesians 5:25-27 King James Version (KJV) 25 Husbands, love your wives, even as Christ also loved the church, and gave himself for it; 26 That he might sanctify and cleanse it with the washing of water by the word, 27 That he might present it to himself a glorious church, not having spot, or wrinkle, or any such thing; but that it should be holy and without blemish.
Paul was told to call on the name of the Lord. He says those words in Romans 10. What did Paul do when told this, Acts 22:26. That baptism was the water baptism of John which included confessing of sins. Mark 1:1-5. And the Holy Spirit because it is now also the baptism of Jesus. He will baptize in the Holy Spirit. NKJV counterfeit. NKJV a deadly translation. NKJV a fraud.
In your opinion what is the most accurate modern version of KJV that actually published hard copies? I wanted an easier to read version to pass out to people.
But Acts 2:38 isn't talking about water baptism. No problem with "let" since baptism is the work of God the Holy Spirit, not my work. You can say it as "forcibly" as you wan't, but that's the work of God and by His promise. Acts 10:43 NKJV To Him all the prophets witness that, through His name, whoever believes in Him will receive remission of sins." Definetely TR is the proper foundation to translation, but that does not guarantee personal interpretation is always spot on.
Translators made choices. It annoys me sometimes how even the NKJV did this often. Did they not know or understand the time honored beliefs for centuries? Keeping my KJV reading Bible and Study. You make crucial points.
You are really right about the SEED. I got myself a new King James and underlined it as the first text I found, cause it competes with The letter of Romans chapter 4. It is the figure of speech that comes back in the new testament. We are adopted in the Seed of Abraham in a spiritual way in FAITH. The Word is the seed. The King James is not just written, it is a connection of understanding the will of God in the words randomly spoken. God watches over his word. That is why the KJV stands because it will never change like others just do with updates.. So for the ones who think that the KJV is not to be taken seriously - Titus 1:15 "Unto the pure all things are pure: but unto them that are defiled and unbelieving is nothing pure ( so they can keep on sinning) but even their mind and conscience is defiled.....".
@Van Guard Oxford did become willing to follow the Wescott and Hort path to false translations. The Apocrapha was never considered as Holy Writ, but only history. We believe God, you do not. He said He preserved His His word, Psalm12:6,7. You and your bible do not. They use other words in Psalm12:6,7. We will continue to believe Godwe will continue to go through the narrow gate. Not the universal wide road
@@judyswiderski2682 Found the KJV-onlyer. You and Omega Visual Branding up above. KJV is a great translation, but it's only that - a translation from one language into another. Meaning, it's not the only translation that is valid or the true Word of God, regardless of some differences from one version to another. He preserves His word, absolutely, but how anyone can believe that means only a particular English translation is beyond me and completely ridiculous. People holding the KJV up as the gold standard that is the only valid Bible is equally absurd, and does nothing but breed tribalism and division in the church.
@@stephenwilson0386 PS. Did not God know that little weak England would become Great Britain and that English would be the international language of trade? Would He not therefore make certain that all manuscripts that were inspired be in them? Also consider this: SALVATION IS A HEART ISSUE! Many believe that they are saved because they said the sinners prayer. Yet, "The heart is deceptive above all things and desperately wicked, who can know it?" Jeremiah 17:9. That prayer may be from Arminianism which states that man can save himself by his free will. Calvinists say that God chooses and who can resist the Holy Spirit? Stephen told his persecutors that they do always resist the Holy Ghost. Acts 7:51. Scripture says, " The LORD is nigh unto them that are of a broken heart and saveth them that be of a contrite spirit. Psalm 34:18, Isaiah 57:!5, 66:2. Ask God to send the Holy Ghost to you, Luke 11:13. He will gently bring your sins to mind. This will be painful because pride hates it! As they come to mind, confess them to Jesus. Persevere. "Awake thou that sleepest, and arise from the dead, and Christ shall give thee light." Ephesians 5:14. WHEN you see your desperate need for a sinless Saviour, CRY OUT to Jesus to save you. That is His desire. Then call upon the name of the Lord. How? As Peter told the Jews who were pricked in the heart. Acts 2:38 and as Paul did. Acts 22:16. They were baptized, calling on the name of the Lord. "Jesus answered and said, Verily, verily I say unto thee, Except a man be born of water and of the Spirit, he cannot enter into the kingdom of God. " John 3:5. John's water baptism included the confessing of sins. Mark 1:1-5. Proverbs 28:13. Jesus baptizes with the Holy Ghost. Luke 3:16. Meditate on Romans 6:3-11 and Colossians 2:6-14, Matthew 28:19-20, 1 Corinthians 12:12-14. King James Bible on line. Helpful tool: Noah Webster 1828 Dictionary on line. Read the King James Bible taken from the inspired Antioch manuscripts. Man does not live by bread alone but by every word that proceedeth out of the mouth of the LORD doth man live. Deuteronomy 8:3, Matthew 4:4 and Luke 4:4. The inspired word of God instructs in righteousness 2 Timothy 3:16. It quickens (gives life). Hebrews 4:12. It shows the way of righteousness unto holiness. 2 Peter 1:2-11. Peter wrote to the Jews and non Jews. To those Paul ministered to. Modern translations continually asks, Did God say??? Did he say, Mark 11:26? Yes.it is imperative to our walk with God. Did God say, Acts 15:34??? How do they have the nerve to ask? It showed God's divine providence. Paul would needed Silas. Throw those Babylonian god inspired books out? YOU CANNOT DRINK THE CUP OF THE LORD AND THE CUP OF THE DEVILS. 1 Corinthians 10:21.Jesus must be your first love. Revelation 2:1-5. To put men or a man above Jesus is idolatry.
@@stephenwilson0386 Meant to send you this also: Which? Thou shalt not murder? Thou shalt no kill? Knowing that the Ten Command- ments are addressing man's relationship with God and man's relationship with man, see what God says. Thou shalt not murder, Exodus 20:13 and Deuteronomy 5:7. Murder would seem to be correct for it is written, "Whoso sheddeth man's blood, by man shall his blood be shed: for in the image of God made he man." Genesis 9:6. Yet, the command goes deeper. What about the accidental killing of someone? In Joshua if any kills another unawares and unwillingly, and hated him not (Joshua 29:3, Deuteronomy 4:4) a person could run to a city of refuge and not die at the hands of the avenger of blood. (Joshua 20:9). If the person is found not guilty of murder, that person is not able to return to his field to work it. He must remain in the city to protect himself from the avenger of blood.(Numbers 35:27 to 32). Clearly, God places great value on each person.
It seems like the NASB 95 is very close to the King James version in many places and I was wondering if you had any opinion on THAT since it does read the same in many places?
Wow, I never knew there was so many differences between the NKJV & KJV. I'm days away from replacing my 1992 Spirit Filled Life Bible because it is worn to the point of almost falling apart. It is a NKJV. After watching this I will go back to the KJV. Pastor can you please give me a good reference for a study Bible? I'm stuck deciding between the New Spirit Filled Life Bible and Life Application Bible or is there any other you can recommend? I live in South Africa. Thank you and God bless.
In 5:32…. Pastor, this exactly is called theological bias or translator doctrinal bias. Ah! Interesting premise but on referring the mentioned verses, the views presented here are quite clearly non scholarly and totally KJV fanboyism 🤓. And that’s ok, you are passionate about the scripture and that’s what finally matters. Good work.
@@NewLifeOfAlbanyGa The Bible is very clear that once you are in Christ, you are complete in Him and are kept by the power of God through the faith OF Jesus Christ. If one could lose their salvation, they would, because we all fall short every day whether in thought, word, or deed. So the Lord saved me but didn't know I would sin next week? Stop it. It was His obedience, not ours. If you think you can lose it, then you automatically think you have to do something to keep it and that is by your works. And if it is by works, then it is no more of grace. Jesus will profit you nothing. The focus needs to be on Him. Not ourselves. You can NOT change God's plan to reconcile us to Himself. We do good works because we are saved. We are sanctified and glorified once we are washed in the blood. Good day
In the Greek at Acts 2:38 both repent (active voice) and be baptized (pass vo) are in the imperative mood, which makes you correct at that point. But you didn't say that, and my guess is you didn't know it. You said the NKJV sounded weak. The problem with most Bible critiques (such as yours here) is that they are subjective and doctrinally based. Which means, you want the translator to put what should be there doctrinally, instead of what is there technically. This desire on your part, this "well meaning," this subjectivity, of course, is obnoxious to any objective, intelligent person and makes your critique useless, except to your cronies.
Nah. My issue is I sit down once a week and do all of these videos, 10-20, off the top of my head from previous study. So it won't be detailed on minutiae normally. But I appreciate the information! God bless!
No one seems to question the Greek sources, just the KJV. Its a forgone conclusion that the KJV not accurate with a majority of authorities (so-called) saying so. But ridicule follows if we question those authoritative voices. How do we know the Greek is correct and not corrupt? I agree that what the Bible says goes and should not be filtered through doctrine, but the other way around. Nor should we look to all what is purported to be the original languages because we don't like whats in the KJV.
Your view lacks objectivity. What Greek? The Greek of the KVB translators, Dead Koine Greek, Four other dead Greek languages, Strong's secular Greek, Greek in the Sinaticus, Greek in the Vaticanus? Which one is correct? "you want the translator to put what should be there doctrinally"...is simply your biased opinion.
In the Romans chapter 13 verse 2, when it reads "damnation" is it really eternal damnation? If that were the case then why preach to prisoners? They are eternally damned. More over, if Police kill you are you eternally Damned also? Or is it rather earthly damnation/punishment/judgement? And if that were the case, many of the apostoles were in prison, they were jailed.they were persecuted. So in that instance they resisted the power. So are they eternally Damned as well? Thank you in advance for any clarity on that verse.
If anyone has been to the metaphysical place called hell,what was it like? How did it look, smell,or feel? What did you see? All translations of the Bible teach us to be better people.
Finally he shows my problem with the KJV. Because he like so many create doctrines from the KJV that don't exist based on the fact that they don't even understand their own KJV.
@@tpham7632 That would be FALSE. Yes a few were well known one was perpetually drunk. They were not the best scholars available - they refused. And several simply didn't show up. Neither did they WRITE a Bible. They copied edited and corrupted previous Bibles to please the Sodomite head of the State Catholic Church. The ONLY purpose of the CATHOLIC KJB was to displace the Geneva Bible. An HONEST PROTESTANT Bible that infuriated the wicked pervert on the throne. To that end verses were twisted and corrupted to comply with the 15 rules imposed on the editors by the King. Try to find GOD SAVE THE KING in any Greek or Hebrew text anywhere. Or any other Bible. Like many corruptions of the texts ONLY found in the corruption known as the KJB
I love the KJV so, what would be the best study bible to use? My Thompson Chain was stolen, which I just loved, what should I replace it with having no money?
Paul wasn't wrong. You may be wrong in your exegesis of the Bible in that one place. This is exactly how false doctrine gets started. Beware, and that's exactly what I'm saying. I have an Interlinear Bible and usually consult that to be sure of anything like this. You want to start an argument, and all I'm saying is "descendants" makes more sense in the verse here. It doesn't diminish the Bible in anyway to have the correct wording here. Unless the apostles quote the Bible to make it clear what they are saying, then it would make sense. Exegesis is sometimes just another person's opinion. My faith does not ride on a person's opinion.
Thzt is what Paul did when he was told to call on the name of the Lord. Acts 22:16. He obeyed. He was baptized with water and the Spirit by the power of Jesus' name. That bapti ssf m included the a to as l confession of sins. Mark 1:1-5.
An advocate for the KJV though I am, edmack4me, I do acknowledge the fact that there are some things in the KJV that require some extra study to get to the intent of the original communications of the Lord & there are some updates that can be rendered in some places that would only facilitate understanding & the immediacy of understanding (e.g. certain punctuation marks' usages were different back in the time of the KJV translators from that of more modern times & thus a faithful rendering of punctuation marks or the omission of particular punctuation marks would only aid in clarity of certain passages subjected to the English language; relatedly, there is benefit in accurate honorific capitalization of the initial grapheme of nouns & pronouns referring to Yahweh pre-Incarnation & since His Incarnation, being careful though to not use this convention in the cases wherein unbelievers are quoted, for, obviously, they being unbelievers means they are not thinking of Him as being the Almighty, especially in the NT wherein He in the form of the Christ was rejected either as an imposter or as nothing more than a mere human teacher; likewise, open & closed quotation marks to indicate the beginning & the end of each individual being quoted would be helpful; etc). But this guitarflame79 fellow is just biased against the KJV & is evidently on a campaign to descredit it entirely & that is a serious problem, one that indicates that something quite questionable, to say the least, is afoot!
At 5:11 -6 this is very misleading. When the word seed clearly refers to descendants of plural then the NKJV translates it as descendants but Gen 22:18 which is what Paul is quoting in Gal the NKJV uses Seed clearly showing the Promises fulfilled in Christ.
You sound like my dad, who taught the Bible for 65 years. He liked the King James, but was disappointed with the New King James. He was very careful of the theological significance of Bible wording and trembled before the Word of God.
Thanks God for your life and ministry Pastor for shedding light on this very important subject. May you continue to share this wisdom all the more! Although there are poor bible translations out there, there are servants like you that could help us to better understand the scriptures by the help and guidance of the Holy Ghost. Glory to God!
I do hope and pray that Pastors and Bible teachers explain the pure word of God we all read from various languages from the original Hebrew and Greek and Aramaic language so we could really understand what God actually said from the original tongues.
the nkjv relies on the alexandrian text you need to find the Cambridge pure Edition King James Bible that goes off the antioch text , the alexandrian school is the one that stoned Steven in acts 8. HELLO? ANYBODY HOME? HUH?
Sir, you do not believe Act 2:38. The Text teaches Repent followed by baptism results in remission of sins. Why do you teach Repent brings salvation followed by baptism? KJV or NKJV. Salvation comes after baptism.
If I were to use my handy-dandy pen or pencil in my Holman NKJV Study Bible and make the many corrections, many of which are trivial at best, such as the difference between "devils" and "demons," would this be sufficient?
Devils are fallen angels, as is described in the KJB Bible; the devil and his angels, which are devils. He hath a devil is someone possessed of a fallen angel. Demon comes from the SECULAR Greek, "daemon", which is a spirit (could be wicked or good). Demon originates from paganism. So it is from mythology. Not the same as biblical devil in which the KJB describes. Simarily, many modern versions use Hades in the place of hell. Hades is not the same place as hell. Hades, again, comes from secular/pagan Greek mythology. Hades can be a not-so-bad place, unlike hell. (The river Styx flows through Hades). Modern versions do not update English so much as they claim, however they are weaving in more natural, secular and pagan words into the Bible. These constitute doctrinal changes, however subtle they may be. How does this occur? It is the manuscripts they use being touted as the oldest, so they must be the best. Also, Hebrew and Greek Lexicons. Greek Lexicons were first written to decipher the Greek mythology, philosophers, plays, science, etc; like Philo, Plato, Socrates, Hypocrates, etc. Afterwards they were used (plagiarized/compiled) to decipher the Bible. (you can research that). So, that is why you find so many secular definitions included in Greek and Hebrew in the back of Strong's Concordance. No other Lexicons are any better. They are not reliable sources for study or to find truth. The KJB words fit the context and make perfect sense as it is.
@Van Guard @Van Guard none of what you are saying is true. You believe liberal, unbelieving scholars and commentators over the Bible. Daemon is secular Grk word not biblical grk. Devil is English for fallen Lucifer and his angels. The Greek work hades is a temporal place in Greek mythology, and an eternal place in the Bible...because the context dictates it and the translators knew that it was. Several prior English bibles also translate hades as hell as well as the KJB. Hades is a transliteration and Hell is a translation into English of what the word means. Hell is a place of eternal punishment made for the devil and his angels, and enlarged to accommodate his human followers...to be cast into the lake of fire. The teutonic word hel is from the tectonic language and pagan beliefs, not tbe same as the Bible. Many words in all languages have different meanings. When it comes to dead Hebrew and Greek, are we supposed to buy scholars cleaver claims that translators had ulterior motives because they tranlated a word differently in various passages? Obviously, there is context right in the surrounding verses within a passage. Elohim is plural to describe God's majesty and also singular to describe the Aaron's golden calf as a god. So Elohim can rightly be traslated God and god in English. Btw, as a recent language made up several other languages, English has more words than Hebrew and Greek. God preserved his word throughout Hebrew, Greek, Aramaic, Latin and culminating in English. Two streams of manuscripts make up the kjv and all modern bibles. The kjv agrees with 6,000+ mss and modern versions are based on mostly 2 out of 5. The 5 are what most all modern scholars promote. That doesn't mean they're true. They are the most corrected, corruptions that no one denies, yet because they are believed to be the oldest that somehow makes them the best...based on a hypothesis that only the originals are inspired. This is totally opposite what the Bible/kjv says because they are based on totally different texts.
@@paulrobinson9318 No that is correct early modern English, not illiteracy. There is one devil named Satan who has lesser devils under him. Satan is just the chief devil. Lucifer, now Satan, was an arch angel. A third of God's angels flowed Lucifer in his rebellion. They are all angels; now are all devils. My bible says devils. What is the problem with that? We should allow the Bible correct us, not find fault with the Bible.
Only one is the Word of God , the other is the word of Satan , different is the opposite of the Same , God never gave us 2 separate manuscripts , only one , and only one is His true Word .
@@nzbrotrev9028 There are many manuscripts. The oldest ones are fragments, that often don't even agree with each other. There's no such thing as an "original manuscript" of any biblical book that exists anywhere in the world that we know of. The oldest we have were written hundreds of years after the original writing.
@@RevBRV I agree with that statement , but only one is the Word of God , the other is Antichrist, we can't have two separate (different) Bibles . Sample of why I don't ont care for the new translations. NIV , ESV both say , Elhanan killed Goliath 2 Samuel 21 v 19 , that is a lie , we both know it was David , 1 Samuel 17 v 51 . We could find a million fragments of Manuscripts , but if they contradict what God has said , we should reject the them .
Isn't the new King James version mostly a new translation and not a revision of the King James version which has the last one in 1769 as I think it says on Google?
NKJV uses Christian technical vocabulary, for scholarly Christians. I keep going back to KJV, because it seem to be an easier read than NKJV. However, I was saved through reading the old NIV.
Dont' matter which Bible you use to be saved, but the Bible is like a trojan horse. you get the mesage of salvation in every one but some minor things can affect doctrine and lead you astray..
Read the verse in the MEV where a woman says blessed is the womb that bare the and the paps thou sucked and Jesus says yea rather blessed are those hear the Word of God and keep it. It's in Luke 11. MEV mangles it and makes it look like Mary worship. Such a disappointment
New King James Version Of The Bible does away with the "Comforter". The Comforter is the cornerstone of Jesus' teaching and to take it out is Blasphemy. Mankind is still in its infancy and is not meant to know all the answers at this time.
it sounds the same, but is it? I looked it up: evil seems to being the opposite of good and wickness. While calamity is when you have a great loss... those are two differnt words... hmmmm, stick with KJV.
While I agree with you on many points, it must also be pointed out that the original King James did not have the benefit of the Greek and Hebrew translations, that are widely available today. There was also a lot of bias from King James who also forced on the scribes when writing the translations into English from the Latin. The King forced the scribes to omit certain words and reinforce others. While watching your video I also followed along on biblegateway.com and was able to do a side by side comparison, and also include NASB and ESV. I prefer the KJV, then the NKJV which has the best of both the KJV and the Greek and Hebrew, without the Influence of King James as we watched over the scribes. Dr. James White has done extensive research and concluded the KJV was completely under the influence of KJ himself and not exactly Literal in its translation. Just keep an open mind and do your own research. Againt KJV only people assume that the King James is perfect, but it is not and in light of new information about KJV and its scribes, and that Revelation was a paraphrase because the scribes of King James didnt have the original manuscripts for Revelations ( only bits and pieces), but were forced to go to print, should leave some room for doubt.
Not sure I follow your “argument” when referring to seed being singular by Paul as scripture in Mark 4:26 refers to seed (not “a seed”) as seed (plural) being cast into the ground. Please explain how “seed” is necessarily singular.
In Galatians 4 Paul says it is seed, singular, not seeds plural. Yet the NKJV translates the Ot passage Paul is referring to as plural, descendants. Inspired Paul knew Greek better than the NKJV translators. It’s a prophecy of Messiah.
@@fiery.mercaba The NKJ is a vast improvement over the KJ - BUT BOTH come from corrupted catholic texts - and neither should be considered an accurate representation of God's revelation. They are a diminishing concession to tradition and Catholicism.
what original notes? most of the "notes" in the gutter columns are reference's with other scripture and short explanations of hebrew or greek words @Nick-wn1xw
As I sat here tonight I prayed to God for guidance & He lead me to this video. I am forever thankful for your obedience to God & doing this video, because I would have traded my KJV for a NKJV. 🤦🏽♀️ THANK YOU, LORD!!! Blessings to you my brother in Christ. 😇
You are blessed. I used the NKJV for many years. Some parts of it bothered me, like John 1:3, made through him instead of made by him. Wish I had known years earlier. I went through testing and found the words of man do not have the power of the word of God. Blessings.
@@judyswiderski2682 You are decieved. Neither conveys the accurate meaning of the Greek fully. Some Greek concepts do NOT translate into English clearly. You are attempting to define the actions of the infinite timeless Godhead in finite terms which is impossible. Nor can the mind if man or the language of man express creation adequately. Neither is fully accurate. Both are at best approximations.
Thank and Bless you for all the presentations diligently posted. Can I inquire, do you know why so many preachers are pushing so hard to get people to leave the KJV?
@@NewLifeOfAlbanyGa God bless you Pastor, this knowledge is needed by such thirsty Christians today being deceived by these modern demonations.(I know that's not a word, you understand)
I was trying to talk to a Facebook teacher today about changes that affect doctrine and his reply to me was the doctrine is a word created by the Catholic Church. I literally broke down into tears. There is no talking to so many so-called pastors and teachers today and I see a version of the Bible in the future being created that will be completely ecumenical without offending anyone. If people do not understand that everything real was created in, by, for and through Christ as the Word as the cornerstone and foundation of our faith, and that he is Truth, and that all we can count on especially today is the Truth of the scriptures... there will come a time that they will have nothing to turn to if they have not loved and sought the Truth.
Thank you for this Video Pastor. I have all the Translations. I was actually looking up the verses you mentioned in the Fire Bible (ESV) -- 😮. That face is the face I have with many Translations. However, I let the Holy Spirit bring to my remembrance what he has taught me. I grew up using the King James Version, but do enjoy comparing Translations. I may only have a few NKJV Bibles ~ one of which is Charles Stanley's Life Principles Bible (but I have his other Translations as well -- ESV and NASB). It truly makes a difference if the Word of Truth is not in the Readers spirit. But the Holy Spirit is very much capable of cutting through ignorance. God bless! ♥️🌄
Anyone looking to see any errors in any translation should be looking at the real Bible, The Greek and Hebrew texts, not comparing it to another English translation. There are errors in the King James Bible. The translators did a very good job but they made mistakes. They were not inspired. Nor did they claim to be inspired. I still use the KJV but I also use the newer formal translations. The NKJV, The NASB, and the ESV are all incredible translations of the true Greek and Hebrew Bible. We have 5,800 Greek New Testament texts. Nobody can claim, without ignorance or intellectual dishonesty, that the KJV doesn’t have mistakes. There are verses in the KJV that actually weaken the argument for the Deity of Christ when compared to all of the other formal translations.
This KJV Only review was more intelligent than all the others on RUclips. Most of the others are done by morons who use idiotic ideology. I love the KJV for many of the same reasons that you do. I still would love you to do an updated review on the KJVER.
+ Charles Doyle Just WHY would you love a corrupted and archaic text when there are so many accurate and honest translations today that are NOT the result of a Catholic theologian and a sodomite kings' rules . . . Makes NO sense to me that a Christian wanting to hear the Words of GOD would even accept anything coming through those filters. "This KJV Only review was more intelligent than all the others on RUclips. Most of the others are done by morons who use idiotic ideology. I love the KJV for many of the same reasons that you do."
@@nzbrotrev9028 How are modern translations cursed when God is using and blessing them to bring many to Christ. Born again of the Spirit of God. Loving the Lord Jesus Christ, unlike the KJV only cult the fruit of the Spirit is evident. If you were a Bible believer instead of a KJV idolater. You would know that "it is by their fruit that you know them" Not what translation of scripture you read. The fruit of the KJV only cult is absolute poison. Full of hypocrisy, double standards and outrageous lies. Calling the word of God cursed because it is not the idol you worship. Is close to blaspheming the Holy Spirit. How can Satan cast out Satan? You sound very much like false teacher and KJV only heretic the Jack Hyles. Again showing how vile and demonic the KJV only cult that Satan has raised up really is. No doctrine is changed in the modern more accurate translations that God has blessed us with. Not one despite your delusions and fantasies. The NIV the translation that Satan hates most, therefore the KJV only cult hates most. Is far stronger on the deity of Christ and the Holy Spirit than your idol the KJV. Also the KJV translators knew their work was not perfect. They said that even the meanest translation is still the word of God. The KJV only cult in their delusions pride and arrogance think they know better. KJV onlyism is an indefensible unbilical Christ dishonouring cancer from the pit of hell.
I read the KJV fairly exclusively and love your videos in defense of it. However, you made a point that I didn't quite understand. Many years ago I had done a word study on the English word "judge" used in the New Testament and had found out at that time that there were 3 Greek words that were all translated as "judge" in the English. One of them was used in the verse where it says to "judge righteous judgement", and I found that the Greek word used there carried a meaning of discernment. Then there was the word judge in the verse that used to say "judge not lest ye be judged" that has now supernaturally changed to "judge not that ye be not judged", and that Greek word carried the sense of "condemn". So I looked further into the word "condemn" at the time and found that it's basically sending someone to hell, damnation. The root of the word is "com", that means "with" and the word "damnare" or as we use it now, damn. So condemn by its root means the exact same thing as damn. So I don't understand the insistence on making the word condemn mean less than that.
I threw my NKJV in the trash and i dont regret it. Not being boastful but I was that angry having a corrupted bible. I had an NIV also that a gave away... should have thrown that one out too but I gave it away before I knew it was a terrible translation.
2 Timothy 3:16. "All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness:" It says ALL scripture. Not everyone in our modern English can understand the KJV. I am am saying that it is not accurate. Jusy not clear to most people today English has evolved so far to words having additional as well as separate meanings. The NASB is supposed to be a more accurate translation word to word. Even above KJV. I feel that all of them can be and should be used.
@@martinbaker7032 Publishers have to change the text by 20% to get their copyright so they can make more $$$ So much for add and take away from scripture. The Textus receptus is the compilation of the most matching copies (6000) from all over the world vs the Critical text which is about 100 non-matching copies from Alexandria. I'm fine with any Bible accurately translated from the Textus receptus.
On the back cover of the NKJV Parallel Bible they claim that it is best transition Bible.. Transitioning from the KJV to " modern translations"........ Why???? There are resources to investigate the differences at Chick publications and several videos that you would benefit from hearing
SO you claim the KJB translators were looking at the BIG picture and understood that Paul's use of SEED and the promise of GOD to Abraham being seed meant the KJB had a better and more unified view than the NKJB (Which I have no love for) yet the LKJB committees could NOT agree on Passover vs Easter which is an OBVIOUS no-brainer - Easter didn't exist in the first century, so the Gospel writers could NOT possibly have used it? IN any event - SEED in old English is both singular and plural - Gen 13:16 - SEED is described as the dust of the earth - hardly a singular. The HEBREW is PLURAL. Your interlinear will use DESCENDANTS as the ONLY available translation. "17 ¶ And it came to pass, that, when the sun went down, and it was dark, behold a smoking furnace, and a burning lamp that passed between those pieces. 18 In the same day the LORD made a covenant with Abram, saying, Unto thy seed have I given this land, from the river of Egypt unto the great river, the river Euphrates: Again we see SEED is plural and can honestly and BEST be translated DESCENDENTS - SEED is a plural word in this case. SO we see ikt used BOTH as a singular and plural - making decendents the rational choice in English. 17 ¶ And it came to pass, when the sun went down and it was dark, that behold, there appeared a smoking oven and a burning torch that passed between those pieces. 18 On the same day the LORD made a covenant with Abram, saying: “To your descendants I have given this land, from the river of Egypt to the great river, the River Euphrates- (New KJV)
I’ve done teaching on Easter. Yes, the KJV Translators considered the OT when translating the NT. Just like virgin in Isaiah 7:14. I’ve done many, many videos on the subject.
+New Life Of Albany Ga. SO then do you admit using Easter in Acts was a sloppy error demonstrating that the various committees did NOT coordinate well? And as a second part - should they not have translated accurately WITHOUT reference to their theology? The Bible is SUPPOSED to be a record of the words GOD gave, translated into any particular language - without the theological intervention of the translators and their relevant theology. EG the KJ names the writers of the gospels as Saint so and so - NOT anywhere found in the early Bibles. Isn't this a man-made corruption? Is manipulating the scriptures apart from what GOD gave by revelation is OK?
@@paulrobinson9318 I don't agree with the use of Passover in the disputed verse for this reason. Passover wasn't on the 15th day. The 15th day marked the beginning of a period of days known as the Feast of Unleavened Bread.
@@paulrobinson9318 You said that I read and defend the KJV. Both of those accusations are false. My disagreements with the KJV adding Easter to their Bible and with the input of Passover in that text in other Bibles are based strictly on biblical evidence.
@@paulrobinson9318 I read up on this and found a great breakdown on when and how Passover/Feast of Unleavened Bread became synonymous with one another. I stand corrected. www.cgg.org/index.cfm/fuseaction/Library.CGGWeekly/ID/741/Is-Passover-on-First-Day-Unleavened-Bread-Part-One.htm
KJV language from 1611 is just too out of date to be useful. Lots of new translations of the textus receptus and majority text are obviously more useful.
+@@fiery.mercaba SO is yours - the problem he is correct, and you are simply pumping vain man-made tradition. "colonyofcells iamamachine, that is a statement of opinion & not opinion based on anything substantial."
I cannot believe what I am hearing from you sir... Have you read the context of these passages you are raising issues against in the NKJV, as well as the Strong's definitions of the words the KJV had, that the NKJV actually puts them in proper context? And I am saddened that you do not believe in eternal security.
@DrWitnesser I've matured in my faith over the past year and agree with what you have said. We can only take hold of eternal security if we have truly repented.
The New king James and all good modern translations are stronger on the deity of Christ, where as the KJV is much weaker in Titus 2:13. The KJV gives two persons in view when it should only be one person in view. (KJV) " of the great God and our Saviour Jesus Christ " ( modern translations) " our great God and Savior Jesus Christ ". I could list a lot more but I won't for sake of time.
+ guitarflame79 Precisely and exactly. The KJ translators were unaware of many of the rules of KOINE Greek - they said so themselves, and so restricted their translation to classical Greek from the 1200's - 6 corrupted incomplete Greek texts (and a LOT of conjecture) is what the KJ is based on, via Catholic theologian Erasmus. IT was factually false that the translators "revised and compared" the KJ to the original texts - I wonder HOW they got away with that false statement? The Graham Sharpe rule is where the newer tets get their strengthened support for BOTH the deity of Christ and the Trinity - the JWs and the KJB agree that Christ is savior but NOT God.
The "trinity" is a fairy tale, @@paulrobinson9318, & that you endorse it is like embarrassing mud on your face in this venue to those who know what mud looks like.
I've been enjoying a lot of your videos the past few days. I'm glad I found your channel, and God bless you brother. I look forward to watching many more of your videos.
Thanks and welcome
When you call something a translation error without looking at the original languages I have to dismiss your statement. You do not correct a translation by looking at a different translation but by looking at the source from which they were translated. Different from the KJV does not mean wrong.
Of course. I’ve gone over that ad naseum on the channel.
@@NewLifeOfAlbanyGa Good to know. I've only seen your study bible reviews before.
@@SaneNoMore Amen. We’re at well over 5,000 videos on the channel, plus the Biblical Archaeology Today with Steve Waldron podcast, another 1500+.
God is not double minded , we can not have two separate, different messages from God ,
One is true , the other is false a counterfeit , in the New translations its say that Elhanan slew Goliath.
2 Samuel 21 v 19 .
That is a lie , an error, a big porky , understand its the corrupted manuscripts that produce corrupt bibles , you can trust the AKJV .
I’m a new Christian. Saved about 5 months ago and baptized last month. I started out with the NASB 2020 and I don’t know if it’s where I wasn’t saved yet or what, but that Bible made me doubt Jesus being God for so long. It was probably just me I don’t know. But this makes me wonder if it has bad stuff like the new king James does. I’ve read some of almost every translation but can’t seem to escape wanting to read the authorized version, this week I have gotten rid of most other translations. I’m not saying they’re evil but something in my spirit just wants me to read the King James Version and not the others. Anyways thank you big brother for your time in this video it was very enlightening.
The other translations for me do not convict me of my sin, in the same way that the KJV does, I have the NASB MacArthur Study Bible 1995 and it just seems like it is another best seller not the Holy Word of God.
God bless you, brother!
I love brother Steve but he does have a big fault and that is that he is "KJV only".
You have nothing to worry about with most modern evangelical translation.
For example, brother Steve mentions Gen 12:6.
Gen 12:6 says, "לְזַ֨רְעֲךָ֔" which is literally translated as "descendants" and not "seed".
Why would the translators do that you might be asking?
Translators did that because it doesn't really matter what Paul later says in Galatians.
When a translation is trying to remain faithful to the original, they translate what the text actually says. Not translate based on what Scripture says later in the Bible.
@@RevDavidReyesWRONG!! KJV is the best and therefore should be the only one we use. There are SIGNIFICANT issues with other translations. They all attack the deity of Jesus.
Hey brother. Sometimes I struggle with this too because God is such a unique being. None is like HIM. Here are some verses to help you out and move forward on your walk and faith in Jesus Christ our Lord .
"For there are three that bear record in heaven, the Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost: and these three are one. And there are three that bear witness in earth, the Spirit, and the water, and the blood: and these three agree in one."
1 John 5:7-8 KJV
"In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God."
John 1:1 KJV
"And the Word was made flesh, and dwelt among us, (and we beheld his glory, the glory as of the only begotten of the Father,) full of grace and truth."
John 1:14 KJV
@@TaskForceBWrong. Modern translations do not attack the deity of Christ. Just another lie from the KJV only cult . In fact the KJV attacks the deity of the Holy Spirit calling him an "it" four times denying his deity . Modern translations correct this gross error. Strange that the hypocrites of the KJV only cult never mention this
During King James's time the word "study" was used as to say "strive" or " to be diligent". Which actually would make that verse have much more sense.
@Reprezent Teez
They were brilliant men who knew multiple languages. The had a deep desire to have an accurate word of God in English..The history of it is amazing.
Tares Among the Wheat Sequal video. The Forbidden Book video RUclips.
God was truly with them. Many lost their lives to bring the word of God to us. Ask the Lord to show you.
+@@judyswiderski2682
Again you lie . . . NOT one person lost their life for the KJB - BUT it was used to justify the killing of 300,000 Irish -
The lived lost for the BIBLE were LONG before the emasculated and state-sponsored KJB corrupted by the English Catholic church.
The Geneva which the KJB was designed to remove from England - was an HONEST, PROTESTANT translation even IF its underlying texts were corrupted by Erasmus.
"They were brilliant men who knew multiple languages. "
They were second rate linguists who knew a number of languages - Greek was NOT the primary language of any of them.
YES some were Brilliant- by HALF of them wanted to rejoin the catholic church, few were saved - and ONE of the Christian on the committees refuse to allow the completed Bible into His pulpit. Such was his animosity to the finished work. The greatest scholar of Hebrew in England MOCKED their work as amateurish. GOD SAVE the KING appears in NO other Bible ever-0 and NEVER in any Hebrew text - BUT its in the KJB.
"The had a deep desire to have an accurate word of God in English..The history of it is amazing. "
Rubbish - The ONLY reason was to remove the Geneva Bible which in a marginal note claiming IF the KING was a bum - remove him. James was NOT just a bum - he was a raging sodomite who justified his lovers by using Christ and John as his example.
"Tares Among the Wheat Sequal video. The Forbidden Book video RUclips. "
CULTISH trash, fantasy and falsehoods - the Smith video by the MORMONS is more factual.
"God was truly with them."
NOT the KJB editors - they paid NO heed to honesty or reliability - BUT what pleased the KING.
" Many lost their lives to bring the word of God to us. "
NOT ONE had any relationship to the KJB - NOT ONE. IT was a state sponsored Bible - NO harm came from it - EXCEPT to the Irish - BUT people WERE persecuted for owning a Geneva -
"WHY do you lie so much?
Ask the Lord to show you."
I have - the KJB is the second poorest translation in existence. A millstone about the neck of the Christian church. A cultic IDOL for the deceived.
@@judyswiderski2682 What Anglican KJV translators lost their lives? After all no translation can ever be perfect. Especially as the language is so archaic that the KJV belongs in a museum. Thank God for better modern translations.
@@martinbaker7032
They were Anglican and Puritan.
The Forbidden Book video is old but fllled with information.
But if you insist on an obvious false Jesus because you do not have to put effort into reading it, then that is your choice.
@@judyswiderski2682 What false Jesus are you talking about? The false Jesus of the Mormons? Or Christian Scientists? Or Jehovah Witnesses? All these cults who deny the deity of Christ, used the KJV to promote these false Jesus's. The Jesus who is my saviour and lord, is Almighty God second person of the trinity. Born of a virgin, conceived by the Holy Spirit the third person of the trinity. Without sin, who became sin for me. Crucified the perfect sacrifice, so there is no more sacrifice for sin, because Jesus paid it all. Raised to life and alive forevermore, the name above all names. Every knee shall bow, and ever tongue will confess that he is Lord. The Jesus who has sent the Holy Spirit, to lead us into all truth. The Spirit himself, not itself as the KJV mistranslate denying his deity. The Holy Spirit who witnesses to my spirit that I am a child of God,? Is that the Jesus that you are talking about? Where in scripture does it say I must read the KJV? Please show me the scripture. I know you can't, because there isn't one. You can rant and rave all you like, but you can't back up your delusions with scripture. In fact what you are doing is promoting another gospel, as a result you are promoting another Jesus. So according to the authority of the word of God, that is witchcraft. Cannot wait to read your next fantasy. But no doubt Satan as deceived you. Otherwise would not continue to promote the the idolatrous blasphemous cult of KJV onlyism. You are not Bible believer, but a KJV only hypocrite.
I've read the Bible many times. It's my favourite book ! It does require effort, but it's worth it.
the nkjv relies on the alexandrian text you need to find the Cambridge pure Edition King James Bible that goes off the antioch text , the alexandrian school is the one that stoned Steven in acts 8.
HELLO? ANYBODY HOME? HUH?
@@ryanmozert
It's interesting that nobody raised him from the dead.
They had enough faith to do it.
@@tedgrant2at times it’s Gods will for us to suffer persecution
@@overcomer749
Why would God want us to suffer ?
He designed and manufactured us very carefully.
If God built a computer, he would not want it to crash !
@@tedgrant2John 15: 20 “Remember the word that I said to you, ‘A servant is not greater than his master.’ If they persecuted Me, they will also persecute you. If they kept My word, they will keep yours also.
It’s not because God wants us to suffer for the sake of it. This world system is anti-God, according to James 4: 4 - Adulterers and adulteresses! Do you not know that friendship with the world is enmity with God? Whoever therefore wants to be a friend of the world makes himself an enemy of God.
This also works the other way around, when we follows Gods ways we’re turning away from the worlds system, and thus we become their enemies. This is why persecution is guaranteed to anyone who genuinely follows God, according to 2Timothy 3: 12 - Yes, and all who desire to live godly in Christ Jesus will suffer persecution.
you have to be willing to pay a price to follow the Lord of All. It’s worth it. Remember the words of Jesus in Luke 14:27 “And whoever does not bear his cross and come after Me cannot be My disciple.
28 “For which of you, intending to build a tower, does not sit down first and count the cost, whether he has enough to finish it-
29 “lest, after he has laid the foundation, and is not able to finish, all who see it begin to mock him,
30 “saying, ‘This man began to build and was not able to finish.’
31 “Or what king, going to make war against another king, does not sit down first and consider whether he is able with ten thousand to meet him who comes against him with twenty thousand?
32 “Or else, while the other is still a great way off, he sends a delegation and asks conditions of peace.
33 “So likewise, whoever of you does not forsake all that he has cannot be My disciple.”
the nkjv relies on the alexandrian text you need to find the Cambridge pure Edition King James Bible that goes off the antioch text , the alexandrian school is the one that stoned Steven in acts 8.
HELLO? ANYBODY HOME? HUH?
Hello cult member
In Genesis 12:6 the word (Heb. אֵלוֹן , elon) means a terebinth tree bearing a certain kind of nut, which is why other translations use “oak”. In 12:7, the word (Heb. זֶרַע, zera) does mean seed, and the closer fulfillment of the promise was realized in Abram’s descendants in Israel. The point that Paul makes to the Galatians is that the promise is fully realized in Christ since He is the true Seed, and the promises of the covenant were made “to” the Seed but the descendants were kept to the same promises under the Law until the Seed would come. Paul even says to this end, “And if ye be Christ's, then are ye Abraham's seed, and heirs according to the promise.” (Galatians 3:29), so the fact that “seed” is a singular word is not a hard and fast rule for all reading but is used to demonstrate that the promise is now only valid in Christ.
cant believe amidst all the REAL problems facing the church in this time with false teachers and teachings we are even discussing these elementary topics, translational issues,,really? do you worship GOD or the translation? how many translations before 1611 and how many after? and you are a pastor? the comment by "328am" had more wisdom in 10 seconds than your 21:45 video.
Jesus talked about jots, tittles, and His Word would not pass away. He said we would live by every Word of God. God is revealed to us by His Word. If it’s important to God it should be important to us.
Look at this one ... (NKJV) A gracious woman retains honor, But ruthless men retain riches. - Proverbs 11:16 vs (KJV)A gracious woman retaineth honour: and strong men retain riches. - Proverbs 11:16
Fascinating!
Ruthless and strong have the same meaning as a verb- do a word study on it before you label it error
I luv the KJV and the NKJV Bibles ✝️😍
For the message of the cross is foolishness to thoses who are "being saved" it is the power of God. 1 Corinthians 1:18 NKJV
For the preaching of the cross is to them that perish foolishness but unto us "which are saved" it is the power of God. 1 Corinthians 1:18 KJV
1 Corinthians 1:18 "being saved" sounds like a future event while "which are saved" sounds like it present.
I just have to compare KJV with the NKJV and take the bible study notes from my NLT and NKJV and place it too my KJV.
The Earlier Church Reformation wouldn't accept the idea of "being saved" we need to focus on the meaning of the cross and we can begin to have good discernment.
I think that's the old NKJV but the new one put back to "been saved".
The Acts 2:37 miss translation hold no water. Let can absolutely be a command. We say that all the time in that context. "Let it happen" or " Let it be as you you said." It's a statement of fact that can easily be taken as a command
Also, the supposed Galatians miss translation seed means family or liniage or decedents. They are all the same thing. Iit seems like your trying to divide and grind your own acts. I understand you have your own favorite translation as do I, however you are suggesting you know more about the nuances of translating then the translators themselve. Better then professional linguistics. That kind of an arrogant claim. Just saying.
Lord bless you and may the doctrin we preach no matter what Bible we trust, be true towards the teachings of Jesus Christ and the Apostles doctrine. Repentance Baptism in Jesus name and in the infilling of the Holy Spirit and that we aught to live separated Holy, living in obedience to the gospel and make disciples as this is the great commission.
Amen!!
Well the point is, Jeff Moore, that it does "matter what Bible in which [an individual] trust[s]"!
It's got to be correct on the page for it to make the heart that embraces what is on the page correct! Except for a merciful intervention of Christ Jesus the Almighty to speak truths by His Spirit into the heart that the necessary realization can be had of what is truth from what is error, to use a supposed "translation" or "version" that is flawed is to make one's self hopelessly flawed in thinking & in practice.
You are suggesting that a person can use a "Bible" that does not really faithfully represent what were the actual messages of the Almighty by terminology & phraseology that is actually equivalent to the original languages & yet still come away with correct information & doctrine & be alright, but this is simply not true! There have been over the years many Oneness Apostolic Pentecostals who were not content with delving sufficiently into the KJV to go beyond any linguistically, hermeneutically & ideologically challenging particular that is in the KJV to ascertain & gain what was exactly intended but rathered to embrace other so-called "versions" who have made spiritual shipwreck, them no longer believing much or any of the Scriptural fundamentals of Oneness Apostolic Pentecostalism, of the Church founded by Christ Jesus the Almighty.
888,888_ fiery_mercaba i agree with you, it does matter. My comment was not implying use whatever bible it was a personal coment in regards to his trust in the kjv and mine in the nkjv. While we hold the exact same doctrinal teaching. Not all bibles are the same alot of them are garbage in my opinion.
Let me put it this way, Jeff Moore. The hierarchy of trust ought to be Christ Jesus the Almighty, above all others, His Spirit, "the Spirit of truth," being present with those who have become His own to empower & to guide. He helps those who trust in Him & are very much inclined to His voice & wanting to differentiate what is truth from what is false, myth, fabrication, misunderstanding, fiction.
As we must have a genuine written down representation of His Word in which we have to have a considerable degree of trust that it is a presenter of His Word, this need being obvious by His own indication of this by having said things like, "Have ye never read in the Scriptures....?", or, "It is written....", & so on, but also our humanity having limitations that make the demand for a physical sourcebook to which to refer for tenets, confirmations, instructions, & guidance, we are individually faced with the challenge of ascertaining which of all the cornucopia of "Bibles" is really the Genuine Representation of His Intended Communications, which is His Book by virtue of having accurately captured the original communications with the graphemic symbolizations of our own mother tongue.
This is an extremely important matter & He has long had me involved in determining what is what in this matter, even from I was a little boy. I personally recognize it as an exceedingly important matter & it is in this realization & in the healthy fear of Him that I discovered the KJV as the most accurate written representative of His Original Communications. It has been by seeing the manifestation in my own life of what numerous things that are documented in the KJV & with obvious confirmation by & blessings of His Spirit that have not only convinced me that I need look no further than the KJV Bible for that which is attested to as being His Word but, by being also familiar with the NKJV, the NIV, & a few other "versions" that I looked into far less yet enough to know their errors, to dismiss & avoid the other "versions", except in the rare cases wherein referencing them a witness of the Lord can lead a person to the truths of the Lord by the smattering of accuracies in them &, ultimately, to the KJV, the sourcebook that has not only a smattering of accuracies but the same accuracies & more accuracies than are in the other "versions."
In short, I would phrase it this way, for this particular situation, you, this pastor, me, & everyone ought to put our individual trust in the Spirit of truth, namely Christ Jesus' Spirit, & rely on Him to infuse us with knowledge, wisdom, & understanding FOR HIS GLORY, to help us to discern truth from falsehood FOR HIS GLORY. Ideally then will come a confirnation that the KJV is indeed good enough English translation out of the original languages for us English speakers &, also, for those looking to use a reliable English translation to inform their translation into a foreign language. It is not that we should ever "trust in" the KJV to the extent that we trust in the Lord Almighty Himself, but we surely can count it as reliable enough for the duties of reading, studying, memorization, meditation, & practice that we are called unto as Christians.
Additionally, we are to not be so discontent or craving more "versions" as if the majority of definitely conflicting & confusing sources -- conflicting & confusing as the devil would desire it to be -- is going to secure for us more truth than the Lord Almighty can lead us to in & by the KJV Bible. To not heed this warning & do otherwise is for one to certainly subject himself or herself to spiritual food poisoning!
One of my favorite passages of Scripture is this that Paul wrote to the Thessalonian saints by the unction of the Spirit: "Prove all things; hold fast that which is good." (Quoted from memory, a thing that, incidentally, becomes far more difficult for those who delve into various "versions.)
+@@fiery.mercaba
NO Bible in existence is as corrupt as the KJB save the NWT - and your assertion of having to have a reliable text while accurate is deceptive - for you present the KJB as the ONLY accurate one when in fact it is the least accurate and reliable Bible today. Its corruption began in its assembly by Erasmus of his 6 partial and corrupted texts - and never improved with the emendations of Beza and Stephanus.
Given that corruption of the misnamed TR - and the political demands of the sodomite King James - HOW could it be a reliable text without a great miracle - and HOW could that miracle be from GOD? For IF God inspired the KJB - then no one before 1611 had an inspired Bible - certainly NOT the early church whose Bibles contradict the KJB - and THEY taught that their Bible was given under inspiration.
I prefer to follow the evidence that the Bible was inspired - and then copied - being corrupted over the centuries in that process -
The job of the Biblical scholar today is to get as close to the originals as possible - and that does NOT include 6 partial texts from th3 1200's.
" . . . them no longer believing much or any of the Scriptural fundamentals of Oneness Apostolic Pentecostalism, of the Church founded by Christ Jesus the Almighty."
Although I taught that for years - they is NO evidence to support it - nowhere nohow.
Maybe , even with your massive revelations, spiritual superiority and profound ego - you MIGHT be wrong?
Pastor Waldron, I have tried to find the Cambridge Large Print you always go back to, but I can't find any. Are they no longer in publication?
Amazon and asv publications, and usually eBay have the. As well as evangelical bible many times.
@@NewLifeOfAlbanyGa Thank you so much!
Read your Bible in the Holy Ghost and let Him explain it to you.The letter killeth but the Spirit gives life. Thanks for your efforts. God bless
Amen!
The Poopsmith Amen!
Read your Authorized Version. The NKJV demotes Jesus. In John 1:3 they say all things were made through him.
In the Authorized Version. All things were made by him. .The definition of God is Creator Being.
The words have meaning
Knowing that the Spirit of Truth will lead us into all truth, i submit this to you:
Modern bibles continually challenge God asking, Did God say? Come on, really?
God said He preserved His word. Psalm 12:6-7. Most modern bibles do not. In other words they are not admitting that God has a standard, His inspired word. His word is quick (alive) and quickens (gives life). His word is eternal.
Most have at least one out and out lie. NKJB lies in Exodus 6:3. They began to call on the name of the Lord in Genesis 4:26.
Others quote Jesus telling his brothers, i am not going to the feast. John 7:8. (Is he saying he is going to break the law of Moses?) He waits and then goes. Liar! BLASPHEMY .
Jesus simply said, not going now, not yet. He waits and then goes. No problem, no lie.
And blatantly they mock Jesus and unashamedly, constantly, with each change ask, Did God say?
Did God say Mark 11:26? Absolutely. It is an essential part of our walk with God. A verse that makes us tremble was added?????
Did God say? Acts 15:34? It shows God's divine providence. Silas was there when Paul needed him for a journey. Obviously Silas remained there.
BRAZENLY, they change or remove a word that gives the believers true power! Matthew 12:31 and Mark 9:29! Some spiritual warfare needs prayer and fasting!
Did God say eleven (11) times in the New Testament the word damnation, eternal burning? Yes. But not in theirs! Did God say?
Did God give three witnesses to that truth? Mark 9:44, 46, 48. They however only have v48. The other two they ask, Did God say? This is important because we need to know the truth and those who preach Annialism, we cease to exist, are easily proven wrong with these verses.
Jesus is God and Jesus is Man. Hebrews supports this with four verses, 3:3, 7:24, 8:3 and 10:12: "But this man, after he had offered one sacrifice for sin for ever, sat down at rhe right hand of God; v10:12. They do not use the clarifying words 'this man' at all. Again, Did God say?
Every change they make is an insult to God and His word.
God said He would curse those who add to or take from His word. Revelation 22:18-19.
In the Old Testament those who honored a false prophet received the reward of that prophet. So the Alexandrian translators, the bible societies the publishers, the promoters, sellers and those who teach from them (showing those ear tickling bibles as God's word) or honor them will be held responsible. If done ignorantly, repent. God will not be mocked.
This happened when the inspired Antioch manuscripts called the Textus Receptus were replaced by the Alexandrian manuscripts called the Codex B or the Vaticanus from the Vatican basement, and the Sianiticus from a monestary. They do not agree with each other and the latter has about 30 changes per page. Obviously inspired by their spiritual father who brings conflict, frustration, despair and DOUBT.
King James Bible online
Helpful tool: Noah Webster 1828 Dictionary online: Look up: REPENT, REGENERATION, BELIEVE, FAITH, REDEMPTION, PERFECT, CONVERSATION, PREVENT, PROPITIATION etc.
Suppliers: Churchkjb.com
Localchurchbiblepublishers.com
Sources:
Adullum Films Documentary
-Tares Among the Wheat video
Books: The Revision Revised and The Last Twelve Verses of Mark, both by William Burgon. Dean Burgon lived during the time of Wescott and Hort.
Book: Look What's Missing by David Daniels Chick.com.
If interested an old video called The Forbidden Book video.
It has some American History also.
My brother.
I love most of your bible review videos. I actually enjoy the way you present them. But in this video, you have seriously perplexed me. I followed along with each scripture you brought up. Upon looking up the definitions in the original Greek and Hebrew, your translations are based on an English language understanding and far from their true definitions. You may want to look deeper before you aim at disqualifying other translations. I was raised on the KJV and still love it to this day. But I also enjoy the NKJV and the HCSB. Not criticizing you brother, just pointing out my observations.
OneLove...
Thank you so much my friend!
How do you know your source, what you are calling the "original Hebrew and Greek", is correct? How do you come to the conclusion it is original or better than the English words in the KJB translated from H/G by it's translators? How does this come about? Is it only the KJV that is questioned, but not the H/G sources of the 19th Century Textual Critics?
+@@brianhaley4471
When has a translation EVER been better than its source?
We have the Dead Sea Scrolls that were untouched for 2000 years - we have texts of the NT from 400 AD and fragments from the first century - BOTH skipping close to 1500 years of hand copying which ALWAYS leads to errors and corruptions.
WHY would you have more faith in a known-to-be corrupt translation which contained 3000 errors when introduces and after 10 revisions STILL has a couple hundred, than the very ancient texts close to and maybe even copies OF, the originals?
"How do you know your source, what you are calling the "original Hebrew and Greek", is correct?"
Its irrational to expect the KJB to be translated "better" than the close copies of the originals - we KNOW that it came from 6 partial catholic Greek texts - assembled by a Catholic theologian, with insertions from the Vulgate and Vaticanus - at the request of a bishop - that the finished texts was dedicated by Erasmus to Pope Leo X - and approved for use in the Catholic church - and then when translated into English - there were amendments opinions and other insertions - all based on those same corrupted 6 catholic Greek texts - - just HOW could you assume that process to be more reliable than finding complete texts from antiquity?
"How do you come to the conclusion it is original or better than the English words in the KJB translated from H/G by it's translators? "
What possible motive could you have to suggest that the translation is superior to the originals? WE know the KJB is corrupted - it failed for political reasons to even stay true to the misnamed "TR" - NOT that that was a reliable text to go from. TODAY we have 5000 ancient texts - all more accurate than the texts from which the KJ was translated.
OTHER than a second divine revelation (which would OBVIOUSLY contradict the first ) of the scriptures - the issue is one of fantasy and NOT fact. God isn't capricious - he was NOT confused when he gave the NT - BUT you are confused IF you think any man-made TRANSLATION is inspired - particularly the KJ corruption. Make an argument for the Geneva and I MIGHT meet you halfway - an HONEST translation from corrupt sources surely beats a DISHONEST translation from corrupt sources.
The sources of the Textual scholars are constantly being questioned and have been for centuries. They are being questioned anew today with Dan Wallace's ambitious program to digitize every fragment known - analyzing each and fitting them to their date and textual sources. They stand up under scrutiny - the KJ fails at every examination. NO such examination of the KJ is considered by its cultist followers. They accept it by (blind, irrational ) faith.
"How does this come about? Is it only the KJV that is questioned, but not the H/G sources of the 19th Century Textual Critics? "
ONLY because the KJB has proven to be corrupt - and of very late date - while the H/G sources are very close to the originals whether Greek OR Hebrew - and in any game of telephone, the message is ONLY accurate for the first few repetitions. Furthermore, compared to the 6 underlying texts - none complete - of the KJB - which did NOT agree with each other - there are 5000+ Greek fragments - some 15000 or more in total - going back within lifetimes of the apostles and heir immediate disciples - from which a majority opinion can be formed.
+@@kingston163
"@Paul Robinson You talk about scripture and the influence of man upon it to the total exclusion of the role of God power and influence. "
NOT at all - you utterly ignore that GOD allowed mankind to corrupt BOTH the perfect world He created and the perfect Word He gave - IF GOD chose to allow mankind to corrupt one, why not the other?
IF God "preserved" His word and protected it perfectly for 1500 years, how do you justify the printing errors - some say 22,000 - in this? Are the translators protected but NOT the printers?
LOGIC has never been the friend of the KJO cultist - neither has history, textual evaluations, scholarship and common sense.
The issue is that you make that kind of irrational statement without any reference at all to reality - you make a Pharisaical assumption that YOU understand this fantastical God you have created in your own mind - totally apart from reality.
YOU utterly ignore the REALITY that the KJB has major variations from the early texts - you utterly ignore that GOD allowed the Politically-dependent translators to first insert 14 extraneous books, then remove them - HOW can anything be "perfect" when bits are added and removed at the will of man?
What possible justification can you even propose for GOD having a hand in the KJB but no other?
WHY do you fight so hard against assembling the Bible originally given to the New Testament Church, rather than one with 1500 years of copying errors, additions opinions and politics?
"For instance, you write, "Its irrational to expect the KJB to be translated "better" than the close copies of the originals" says who you."
Says any intelligent person. WE now have Bibles from the 4th century - one would logically expect they - along with thousands of others from antiquity would be more accurate than 6 partial copies from the 13th century that had been filtered through Catholicism and copied poorly.
" Too difficult for an ALL powerful God as well?"
That's an utterly absurd statement. Its also a logic trap - for IF God could guide an accurate translation from corrupted texts - why then could He not guide an accurate translation from the more ancient more accurate texts?
WHY could he not protect the printers as well? Is God's power and influence limited? YOU seem to make that case. God ONLY had enough power to protect the translation that turned out to be terribly corrupt - but could NOT protect the printers from admonishing "Thou Shalt Commit Adultery" in the infamous adulterers Bible?
IF God could guide a group of political churchmen required to follow the rules set down by a sodomite king, using corrupted sources - by what stretch of illogic could God not far better guide a number of Godly and committed men whose ONLY purpose in translation is to bring honor an glory to God, to make the Scripture more accurate and make it plain and in common comprehensible language?
YOU KJO cultist talk in circles - you never offer any evidence for your mythology - its all blind irrational and illiterate faith in something GOD never did - man-made dogma - guide corrupt political churchmen to produce a "perfect" Bible - TRULY, your faith is a parallel to the Mormon faith. It flies in the face of evidence and reality.
WHY could God NOT guide the translators of the NIV, the EDB, etc? far more easily than the KJB? We KNOW their motives were purer, their sources more accurate and their understanding of the language far superior.
NO politics were involved in those accurate translations.
"Frankly you talk crap to mislead young Christians just as lucifer would like."
And again you deliberately LIE to protect your cult. Lucifer does NOT want the Bible to be understandable, comprehensible, and effective. BY what twisting of Logic could the devil WANT a better, more easily read, more accurate, Bible to be made available?
Satan uses religious tradition in an attempt to thwart God's purposes - it happened at Calvary, it happened in a vain attempt to stop the early church, it happens in vain when God produces accurate modern Bibles - it is your only argument against modern accurate Bibles - Man's vain traditions are always at odds with God's purposes.
YOU utterly ignore the REALITY that going back to the most accurate texts available from the early church cannot be considered following the devil's lead - the blind and irrational faith you show in a demonstrably corrupted Bible certainly smacks of demonic influence to me.
YOU ignore the fact that GOD could NOT possibly have inspired BOTH the Bibles if the early Church AND the KJB - for they have areas of contradiction - do NOT think it more likely tha GOD blessed the early church and inspired THEIR Bibles? WHY would you think that GOD preferred a Bible that has several hundred errors STILL after 10 or so revisions - 3000 at a minimum at its released - some say 22000?
This is the Best God's guidance can produce?
Sorry, my deceived friend - that's NOT My GOD. IF My God inspired a Bible translation, it would be perfect - free from man-made opinion and insertions - Like 1 John 5:7 - which if NO OTHER evidence were available by itself, proved an IMPERFECT and UNinspired KJB
+@@kingston163
Lets think about who's talking crap - YOU want to introduce young Christians to a new faith that requires learning a new language?
WWJD? He spoke in plain and simple street language - and YOU put a millstone around their neck. Christianity should NOT require a university course in Archaic English. Christianity should NOT be expecting those looking for truth to read a corruptible and in accurate Bible .
YOUR downfall as a "faith plus Works" cult is that very often people actually investigate the false claims you make about your corrupt Bible and find it's inaccurate and poorly translated - Then their faith is shipwrecked - IT is impossible for any new convert to be led astray by reading ANY modern and accurate Bible - and you have never even attempted to make a case for that.
The KJB should be outlawed by convention in modern Christian churches - IF you want to keep it as an example of archaic textual chaos - GO for it - BUT stop putting millstones around the necks of new believers.
FACT!!
"Frankly you talk crap to mislead young Christians just as lucifer would like."
Guys, I think we waste time splitting hair over this topic. The Lord God Almighty does not speak to me in Elizabethan English.
The time we waste is better served with our preparing ourselves for the day that is to come.
We fight amongst ourselves when our enemy is the Satan.
I am a conservative Christian but feel we do our God disservice with our infighting.
We are to earnestly contend. And words do matter. Love must prevail no doubt about it.
Thank you for making great videos. I have a hard time understanding the King James I can read it but I barely understand anything I just read, Is every other translation bad?
No
There's KJV study Bibles that help out a lot!
@@Cheryl64014 KJV study Bible helps a lot!!
There’s nothing wrong with the New King James. They use the exact same Textus Receptus as the basis. This video doesn’t explain anything without going back to the Textus Receptus and comparing. You can trust the NKJV, and for you, you’d get more out of it as it is modern english. There’s thousands of renown scholars who will tell you this, but this is the position of the King James only crowd. “No” Isn’t a helpful answer but that’s all he can give because he’s King James only but doesn’t want to plainly come out and say this. There’s problems with being a King James onlyist. Think about this. If the Textus Receptus is in Greek, and the King James is translated in english, FROM the Textus Receptus, then how is it reasonable to compare the New King James directly to the King James, regarding the King James as the basis of the original text when in fact it isn’t?
I have a hard time interpreting and understanding the original KJV Bible. So I got a NKJV, and I have a much easier time understanding it because of the more modern language it uses. What modern day language Bible would you recommend that would be better than the NKJV?
KJVer
what is hard about it?
Simplified KJV is good also.
The KJV is amazing!! I find no issue with reading it.. study to shew thyself approved unto God. @@lav-719
How can I get simplified kjv?@@lav-719
Sometimes God sends an evil spirit to annoy us.
But listening to music can make it go away.
(1st Samuel 16:23)
Amen!
I read and study from both the KJV and the NKJV. For me, both are accurate and acceptable.
I read them also.both of these translations is a word for word translations
James, would both accurate in saying :
"God will provide himself a lamb for a burnt offering"
or
" God will provide for himself the lamb for a burnt offering"
The NKJV denotes Jesus. In John 1:3, all things were made through Him. He cannot be God by definition. God is the Creator Being.
NKJV counterfeit. NKJV a deadly translation. NKJV a fraud.
@@judyswiderski2682 You have taken one verse out of context.
John 1:1-2 affirms the Diety of Jesus.
Amen
Thanks for this video. The problem I have is I don't speak 17th century English, I barely speak 21 century English. How do I improve my comprehension of the KJV? I've heard it said that if you don't understand the KJV you aren't saved. Would you agree with that? What commentary do you recommend?
The Defined KJV or the KJVer, or a dictionary of KJV archaic words like Chick or Cloud have.
No, I don’t agree w that
@@NewLifeOfAlbanyGa thanks
I don't speak 17th century English either... a lot of the words in the later editions of the KJV are normal letters and it makes sense. A lot of them are just words added together like whosoever... also, there are still going to be unknown words in the other Bibles too that you will have to look up and research. Second, we go learn new words and stuff in school/work... so, it should be more worthy to understand the Bible also in context... God bless :)
@@NewLifeOfAlbanyGa Is that what you use Pastor Steve?
@@aaronroman8005 I use KJV
I would encourage anyone here to look up any of the words in question in a trustworthy lexicon like the BDAG or the BDB. It will be quite alarming to see just how accurate the NKJV actually is.
A lexicon written by Roman Catholic Jesuits? Why put a man's book above Gods?
Let God be true and every man a liar
I wonder if he believes Psalm 16:1 “preserve” & Psalm 16:11 “evermore” is the promise of the KJV 1611 edition. Yet majority of KJV are 1769. Matter fact a real 1611 Psalm 16:1 starts with “Michtam”.
@@Jonathan_Gen15.6 I know this guy is not kjv only, but I hate hearing straw man arguments like this. It's very misleading.
What people need to realize is that in Bibliology (what the Bible says about the Bible), the Scriptures are 100% silent on translation & textual matters. Preservation is a doctrine and is the very reason why we have the Bible today while translation is the work of man and the reason why the Bible has yet to be printed in every language...
@@328amwhy you be hating on the kjv I love it I’m not a kjvo I just love the translation and think the poetic language is buetiful but if you read the nkjv your still a brother in Christ
@@xxXQUICKXxx Hating? You couldn't be more wrong. I use the kjv everyday and it's what I preach from every week. I just find videos like this to be VERY misleading and kjv onlyism to cause great schism in the body of Christ.
Have you taken a look at the KJVER ? Thoughts?
I’ve done a review or 2. It’s on the channel. I did a terrible job on the reviews. I hope to do a better one. God Bless!
@@NewLifeOfAlbanyGa do you think its good?
As a senior I grew up with the KJV. Your comments are very interesting but you have not convinced me that the NKJV is a bad translation. I actually use a side by side KJV NKJV. Makes my Bible study much more fruitful. Thanks be to God!
it’s actually pretty good. Just a few mistranslations here and there.
It’s far better than most!
Respect the Teacher. He has lots of knowledge may God Help you not to be Haughty.
Ok is it ok to go against GODS will can u show me anywhere in the old king James thats says it ok to change the word of GOD or any of ur knock off counterfeits because they all come from the old king James they have just been perverted by man none of them same its ok to change the word of GOD but they do say DO NOT ADD TO OR TAKE AWAY NOT ONE FOLI r u ok with that or do u obey GODS word HIS true word keep it true and obey GODS word I can show u many scripture that say do not change these words not one foli what part of that do u not understand?
the nkjv relies on the alexandrian text you need to find the Cambridge pure Edition King James Bible that goes off the antioch text , the alexandrian school is the one that stoned Steven in acts 8.
HELLO? ANYBODY HOME? HUH?
@@ryanmozertnot true
Brother, do you have a compilation of these things? I just got the revised ( noncopyrighted) NKJV with the 84/85 text and wan to compare that with the 1982 and KJV . Ty.
Somewhere....
Even the ESV in Acts 2:38 says "repent and be baptized" it does not say "repent and let everyone be baptized" as it says in the New King James Version.
The everyone obviously applies to new believers, not everyone in Jerusalem but all those who had become new believers at that particular time.
I struggle a bit with the wording of the KJV so I also read the ESV for clarity and the ESV also says "repent and be baptized".
Amen. So often modern versions keep popular passages intact, so as not to arouse controversy.
I think what is lacking is an understanding of modern English. To me, for instance, condemnation & judgement in these contexts, both end in damnation are all equivalent. It sounds more like individual taste than surgical precision issues, especially given the lack of surgical precision in English. I think the only completely accurate Holy Bible are the original texts because those highly dense languages are actually so surgically precise, changing a letter in THOSE languages means different things. As long as you are not reading from the Message or other such paradies, I'm not really going to call a foul. CSB was the first version I read all the way through, the ESV followed, & I'm getting ready to do a side-by-side of the NKJV with them. After that, I'm going to do a side-by-side of the KJV, saving that one for last because of the issue I have with Middle English (blame Shakespeare trauma from homeschool lit). But what I'm hearing is more emotional than textual differences. Can anyone help me see where there is significant variance, please? I'm just not hearing it anywhere except the changes in vocal tone & preferences.
John 1:3 NKJV turns Jesus into a tool.
“All things were made through Him, and without Him nothing was made that was made.”
John 1:3 NKJV
“All things were made by him; and without him was not any thing made that was made.”
John 1:3 KJV
Thank you for the comparison. Very much appreciated.
Seed in Middle English is plural so it literally can mean singular or multiple….. so decedents is correct.
Yet another excellent video! Very important points were made! I know what a Palanquin is, so that didn't bother me.
Haha! Amen!
The word translated “damned, damnation”, etc. (Strong’s 2917, κρίμα ) is also translated “judgment” and “condemnation” in other verses of the KJV. You’re mocking the NKJV for saying “condemnation” when the KJV translators used the same term in many places.
To surmise that the KJV translators were the final authority for whether or not the same word MEANT a particular action was condemned by the Lord in one place or that it unquestionably warranted eternity in Hell in another is a very peculiar approach to exegesis.
This is just what kjvonlyists do. Super hypocritical.
And one is used when its eternal and one its used when its not.
I'm KJV only but if I absolutely had to pick a modern translation it would be the NKJV.
Read it and see how you like it without comparing it to the kjv, when you feel it's too different to you then compare it to the original languages.
@Van Guard
Are you sure about that ? The Geneva calls Jesus " it "
John 1:3-4 1599 Geneva Bible (GNV)
3 All things were made by it, and without it was made nothing that was made.
4 In it was life, and that life was the light of men.
Tim Campbell That’s absolutely crazy but although I prefer the KJV Bible over other translations, the KJV at times calls Holy Spirit an it which doesn’t sound right and I’m honestly not sure why they translated this way.
In this particular matter when I’ve read the NASB they do a better job at exalting the deity of Holy Spirit by not referring to Holy Spirit as an it but to He, Him or Himself. Perhaps brother Waldron can explain why this is.
Here are just a few verses:
John 1:32 And John bare record, saying, I saw the Spirit descending from heaven like a dove, and [it] abode upon him.
Rom 8:16 The Spirit [itself] beareth witness with our spirit, that we are the children of God:
Romans 8:26 Likewise the Spirit also helpeth our infirmities: for we know not what we should pray for as we ought: but the Spirit [itself] maketh intercession for us with groanings which cannot be uttered.
1 Peter 1:11 Searching what, or what manner of time the Spirit of Christ which was in them did signify, when [it] testified beforehand the sufferings of Christ, and the glory that should follow.
I would use the kjver
@Van Guard
See; Counterfeit Bibles: Geneva Bible. NKJV and false KJBs.
There is a very high probably that someone who knows what "judgement" is, also knows what "damnation" is. I dont understand why the NKJV changes words that are easily understandable. And removes or adds words to verses that are also easily understandable. Many times, like you showed, what they do is change the meaning instead. I bought two, a medium sized one, and a smaller one, and Im starting to regret not just getting the KJV. But, at the same time, now I know about this, and it led me to watch this video, which taught me more.
Amen!
I translated the Bible into Portuguese. Lord willing, will have an Apostolic translation in English. God bless.
Thanks pastor for shedding light on the differences between those two versions of the Bible . Can there be a translation that has updated English and yet retains the accuracy of the kjv ?
Probably, I just don’t think it’s been done yet.
Check out the Modern English Version
SKJV does a very good job.
I have a kjv/nkjv parallel bible. I usually compare from time to time.
Amen!
@@NewLifeOfAlbanyGa You cannot use it like that to see how many errors the other translation had. You must compare it to the original manuscripts/languages, then you will notice that the kjv has many errors, more than other translations.
@@BloodBoughtMinistries
Which ms
Manuscripts are you referring to? If you are using the Hrbrew Greek Alexandrian manuscripts, therecwould be many errors. However they do not agree with each other and one does not agree with itself.
@@BloodBoughtMinistries
Also, the proof is in the pudding. The NKJV denotes Jesus. John 1:3, all things were made through him. He cannot by definition be God,, the Crestor Being.
NKJV counterfeit. NKJV a deadly translation. NKJV a fraud..
@@judyswiderski2682A KJV only cultist a blasphemous idolatrous cult that Satan has raised up.
So which English bible version I've to use as I'm not familiar with Elizabethian English?
The KJV. Ye is plural and thee and thou are singular in the KJV. It is reflecting singular and plural from Hebrew and Greek and has nothing to do with Elizabethan English. English is cohered by the KJV and Shakespeare. It’s modern English, which began in 1526 with Tyndales Bible.
Tyndale's New Testament is easier to read and doesn't leave Luke 17:34 up for debate.
The problem alot of Baptists have with other Texus Receptus bibles is they thought they new their bible, til they read a more accurate one, and now they feel like they have to study all over again
Interesting take.
I suspect that pride and fear do indeed play a role, which is very unfortunate.
NKJV a deadly translation. NKJV a fraud. NKJV counterfeit.
Most of the time, the verses they actually do preach on with the other versions is the still the same as the KJV just with modern langauge and it didnt affect the doctrine.
At the beginning, the speaker makes a huge error in stating that water baptism is being born of water. The water that Peter spoke of in Acts 2:38 is the washing of water by the word of God. Note the verses below.
Ephesians 5:25-27 King James Version (KJV)
25 Husbands, love your wives, even as Christ also loved the church, and gave himself for it;
26 That he might sanctify and cleanse it with the washing of water by the word,
27 That he might present it to himself a glorious church, not having spot, or wrinkle, or any such thing; but that it should be holy and without blemish.
Paul was told to call on the name of the Lord. He says those words in Romans 10. What did Paul do when told this, Acts 22:26.
That baptism was the water baptism of John which included confessing of sins. Mark 1:1-5. And the Holy Spirit because it is now also the baptism of Jesus. He will baptize in the Holy Spirit.
NKJV counterfeit. NKJV a deadly translation. NKJV a fraud.
God bless you, Pastor Steve! Thank you for your excellent videos!
You are very welcome
Thank you Pastor Steve you are so gentle yet passionate about our learning thank you so much.
In your opinion what is the most accurate modern version of KJV that actually published hard copies?
I wanted an easier to read version to pass out to people.
KJVer maybe?
But Acts 2:38 isn't talking about water baptism. No problem with "let" since baptism is the work of God the Holy Spirit, not my work. You can say it as "forcibly" as you wan't, but that's the work of God and by His promise.
Acts 10:43 NKJV To Him all the prophets witness that, through His name, whoever believes in Him will receive remission of sins."
Definetely TR is the proper foundation to translation, but that does not guarantee personal interpretation is always spot on.
NKJV a deadly translation. NKJV counterfeit. NKJV a fraud.
Translators made choices. It annoys me sometimes how even the NKJV did this often. Did they not know or understand the time honored beliefs for centuries? Keeping my KJV reading Bible and Study. You make crucial points.
You are really right about the SEED. I got myself a new King James and underlined it as the first text I found, cause it competes with The letter of Romans chapter 4. It is the figure of speech that comes back in the new testament. We are adopted in the Seed of Abraham in a spiritual way in FAITH. The Word is the seed. The King James is not just written, it is a connection of understanding the will of God in the words randomly spoken. God watches over his word. That is why the KJV stands because it will never change like others just do with updates.. So for the ones who think that the KJV is not to be taken seriously - Titus 1:15 "Unto the pure all things are pure: but unto them that are defiled and unbelieving is nothing pure ( so they can keep on sinning) but even their mind and conscience is defiled.....".
Amen. Proverbs 13:13.
@Van Guard
Oxford did become willing to follow the Wescott and Hort path to false translations. The Apocrapha was never considered as Holy Writ, but only history.
We believe God, you do not. He said He preserved His His word, Psalm12:6,7. You and your bible do not. They use other words in Psalm12:6,7.
We will continue to believe Godwe will continue to go through the narrow gate. Not the universal wide road
@@judyswiderski2682 Found the KJV-onlyer. You and Omega Visual Branding up above. KJV is a great translation, but it's only that - a translation from one language into another. Meaning, it's not the only translation that is valid or the true Word of God, regardless of some differences from one version to another. He preserves His word, absolutely, but how anyone can believe that means only a particular English translation is beyond me and completely ridiculous. People holding the KJV up as the gold standard that is the only valid Bible is equally absurd, and does nothing but breed tribalism and division in the church.
@@stephenwilson0386
PS. Did not God know that little weak England would become Great Britain and that English would be the international language of trade? Would He not therefore make certain that all manuscripts that were inspired be in them?
Also consider this:
SALVATION IS A HEART ISSUE!
Many believe that they are saved because they said the sinners prayer. Yet, "The heart is deceptive above all things and desperately wicked, who can know it?" Jeremiah 17:9.
That prayer may be from Arminianism which states that man can save himself by his free will. Calvinists say that God chooses and who can resist the Holy Spirit? Stephen told his persecutors that they do always resist the Holy Ghost. Acts 7:51.
Scripture says, " The LORD is nigh unto them that are of a broken heart and saveth them that be of a contrite spirit. Psalm 34:18, Isaiah 57:!5, 66:2.
Ask God to send the Holy Ghost to you, Luke 11:13. He will gently bring your sins to mind. This will be painful because pride hates it! As they come to mind, confess them to Jesus. Persevere. "Awake thou that sleepest, and arise from the dead, and Christ shall give thee light." Ephesians 5:14. WHEN you see your desperate need for a sinless Saviour, CRY OUT to Jesus to save you. That is His desire.
Then call upon the name of the Lord. How? As Peter told the Jews who were pricked in the heart. Acts 2:38 and as Paul did. Acts 22:16. They were baptized, calling on the name of the Lord.
"Jesus answered and said, Verily, verily I say unto thee, Except a man be born of water and of the Spirit, he cannot enter into the kingdom of God. " John 3:5. John's water baptism included the confessing of sins. Mark 1:1-5. Proverbs 28:13. Jesus baptizes with the Holy Ghost. Luke 3:16.
Meditate on Romans 6:3-11 and Colossians 2:6-14, Matthew 28:19-20, 1 Corinthians 12:12-14.
King James Bible on line.
Helpful tool: Noah Webster 1828 Dictionary on line.
Read the King James Bible taken from the inspired Antioch manuscripts.
Man does not live by bread alone but by every word that proceedeth out of the mouth of the LORD doth man live.
Deuteronomy 8:3, Matthew 4:4 and Luke 4:4.
The inspired word of God instructs in righteousness 2 Timothy 3:16. It quickens (gives life).
Hebrews 4:12. It shows the way of righteousness unto holiness. 2 Peter 1:2-11. Peter wrote to the Jews and non Jews. To those Paul ministered to.
Modern translations continually asks, Did God say??? Did he say, Mark 11:26? Yes.it is imperative to our walk with God. Did God say,
Acts 15:34??? How do they have the nerve to ask? It showed God's divine providence. Paul would needed Silas.
Throw those Babylonian god inspired books out?
YOU CANNOT DRINK THE CUP OF THE LORD AND THE CUP OF THE DEVILS. 1 Corinthians 10:21.Jesus must be your first love. Revelation 2:1-5. To put men or a man above Jesus is idolatry.
@@stephenwilson0386
Meant to send you this also:
Which? Thou shalt not murder? Thou shalt no kill?
Knowing that the Ten Command-
ments are addressing man's relationship with God and man's relationship with man, see what God says.
Thou shalt not murder, Exodus 20:13 and Deuteronomy 5:7. Murder would seem to be correct for it is written, "Whoso sheddeth man's blood, by man shall his blood be shed: for in the image of God made he man." Genesis 9:6.
Yet, the command goes deeper. What about the accidental killing of someone? In Joshua if any kills another unawares and unwillingly, and hated him not (Joshua 29:3, Deuteronomy 4:4) a person could run to a city of refuge and not die at the hands of the avenger of blood. (Joshua 20:9).
If the person is found not guilty of murder, that person is not able to return to his field to work it. He must remain in the city to protect himself from the avenger of blood.(Numbers 35:27 to 32).
Clearly, God places great value on each person.
It seems like the NASB 95 is very close to the King James version in many places and I was wondering if you had any opinion on THAT since it does read the same in many places?
It is fascinating.
Wow, I never knew there was so many differences between the NKJV & KJV. I'm days away from replacing my 1992 Spirit Filled Life Bible because it is worn to the point of almost falling apart. It is a NKJV. After watching this I will go back to the KJV. Pastor can you please give me a good reference for a study Bible? I'm stuck deciding between the New Spirit Filled Life Bible and Life Application Bible or is there any other you can recommend? I live in South Africa. Thank you and God bless.
I just did a video on my top 10 favorite Study Bibles you may want to check out. God bless!
Did you mention you wrote a book about the translation differences? What’s it called and where can it be purchased?
Currently being reformatted and updated.
In 5:32…. Pastor, this exactly is called theological bias or translator doctrinal bias. Ah! Interesting premise but on referring the mentioned verses, the views presented here are quite clearly non scholarly and totally KJV fanboyism 🤓. And that’s ok, you are passionate about the scripture and that’s what finally matters. Good work.
Eternal security is the truth and I am KJV only. I guess you can break God's seal. What a mighty man you are...
The Bible is very clear once saved people can be lost. I examine the evidence in a few videos. God bless.
@@NewLifeOfAlbanyGa The Bible is very clear that once you are in Christ, you are complete in Him and are kept by the power of God through the faith OF Jesus Christ. If one could lose their salvation, they would, because we all fall short every day whether in thought, word, or deed. So the Lord saved me but didn't know I would sin next week? Stop it. It was His obedience, not ours. If you think you can lose it, then you automatically think you have to do something to keep it and that is by your works. And if it is by works, then it is no more of grace. Jesus will profit you nothing. The focus needs to be on Him. Not ourselves. You can NOT change God's plan to reconcile us to Himself. We do good works because we are saved. We are sanctified and glorified once we are washed in the blood. Good day
@@davidchumney perfect
@@davidchumney Amen, perfect example of Jesus's finished work.
@@NewLifeOfAlbanyGa Other channels like truth in Genesis says you cant' lose salvation and they are also KJV only.
In the Greek at Acts 2:38 both repent (active voice) and be baptized (pass vo) are in the imperative mood, which makes you correct at that point. But you didn't say that, and my guess is you didn't know it. You said the NKJV sounded weak. The problem with most Bible critiques (such as yours here) is that they are subjective and doctrinally based. Which means, you want the translator to put what should be there doctrinally, instead of what is there technically. This desire on your part, this "well meaning," this subjectivity, of course, is obnoxious to any objective, intelligent person and makes your critique useless, except to your cronies.
Nah. My issue is I sit down once a week and do all of these videos, 10-20, off the top of my head from previous study. So it won't be detailed on minutiae normally. But I appreciate the information! God bless!
No one seems to question the Greek sources, just the KJV. Its a forgone conclusion that the KJV not accurate with a majority of authorities (so-called) saying so. But ridicule follows if we question those authoritative voices. How do we know the Greek is correct and not corrupt? I agree that what the Bible says goes and should not be filtered through doctrine, but the other way around. Nor should we look to all what is purported to be the original languages because we don't like whats in the KJV.
Your view lacks objectivity. What Greek? The Greek of the KVB translators, Dead Koine Greek, Four other dead Greek languages, Strong's secular Greek, Greek in the Sinaticus, Greek in the Vaticanus? Which one is correct? "you want the translator to put what should be there doctrinally"...is simply your biased opinion.
greg harvey I'm NKJV and I agree
greg harvey Thank you; my point too
In the Romans chapter 13 verse 2, when it reads "damnation" is it really eternal damnation? If that were the case then why preach to prisoners? They are eternally damned. More over, if Police kill you are you eternally Damned also? Or is it rather earthly damnation/punishment/judgement? And if that were the case, many of the apostoles were in prison, they were jailed.they were persecuted. So in that instance they resisted the power. So are they eternally Damned as well?
Thank you in advance for any clarity on that verse.
I’m not following your thinking my friend. Trying.
Listening to your videos I’ve realized we don’t have much in common. I’ll follow 2 Timothy 2:22-24
Thank you for this verse. The Bible is the authority and I will follow it.
If anyone has been to the metaphysical place called hell,what was it like? How did it look, smell,or feel? What did you see? All translations of the Bible teach us to be better people.
Finally he shows my problem with the KJV. Because he like so many create doctrines from the KJV that don't exist based on the fact that they don't even understand their own KJV.
My friend, what are you talking about.
Would you name a doctrine, he mentions, from the KJV that you think is wrong and explain why? That would be helpful.
We are still awaiting your elaboration, Christian Lives Matter // Crews.
What problem? 50 well known scholars and expert linguistics wrote the KJV
@@tpham7632 That would be FALSE.
Yes a few were well known one was perpetually drunk.
They were not the best scholars available - they refused. And several simply didn't show up.
Neither did they WRITE a Bible.
They copied edited and corrupted previous Bibles to please the Sodomite head of the State Catholic Church.
The ONLY purpose of the CATHOLIC KJB was to displace the Geneva Bible. An HONEST PROTESTANT Bible that infuriated the wicked pervert on the throne.
To that end verses were twisted and corrupted to comply with the 15 rules imposed on the editors by the King.
Try to find GOD SAVE THE KING in any Greek or Hebrew text anywhere.
Or any other Bible. Like many corruptions of the texts ONLY found in the corruption known as the KJB
I love the KJV so, what would be the best study bible to use? My Thompson Chain was stolen, which I just loved, what should I replace it with having no money?
read.amazon.com/kp/embed?asin=B000SEGJ80&preview=newtab&linkCode=kpe&ref_=cm_sw_r_kb_dp_KpGHFbWV8R7FD
The dictionary says the word "seed" can mean descendants. I still like the NKJV.
Paul said it meant 1 in this instance in Galatians.
Yes, and I'm referring to the OT reading.
So Paul was wrong?
Paul wasn't wrong. You may be wrong in your exegesis of the Bible in that one place. This is exactly how false doctrine gets started. Beware, and that's exactly what I'm saying. I have an Interlinear Bible and usually consult that to be sure of anything like this. You want to start an argument, and all I'm saying is "descendants" makes more sense in the verse here. It doesn't diminish the Bible in anyway to have the correct wording here. Unless the apostles quote the Bible to make it clear what they are saying, then it would make sense. Exegesis is sometimes just another person's opinion. My faith does not ride on a person's opinion.
Maybe it would make you feel better to know the Septuagint version of the NKJV has "seed" in that verse.
I only care which one is closer to the Received Text. If “be baptized” is in the passive tense, then NKJV is more accurate. That’s all that matters.
You are right trail.
Thzt is what Paul did when he was told to call on the name of the Lord. Acts 22:16. He obeyed. He was baptized with water and the Spirit by the power of Jesus' name. That bapti ssf m included the a to as l confession of sins. Mark 1:1-5.
How about doing a video on the errors in the King James version!
Haha! Good stuff
It would be a short video
Why don't you list here what you call "errors in the KJV" so that we can see & clarify them for you, guitarflame79?
An advocate for the KJV though I am, edmack4me, I do acknowledge the fact that there are some things in the KJV that require some extra study to get to the intent of the original communications of the Lord & there are some updates that can be rendered in some places that would only facilitate understanding & the immediacy of understanding (e.g. certain punctuation marks' usages were different back in the time of the KJV translators from that of more modern times & thus a faithful rendering of punctuation marks or the omission of particular punctuation marks would only aid in clarity of certain passages subjected to the English language; relatedly, there is benefit in accurate honorific capitalization of the initial grapheme of nouns & pronouns referring to Yahweh pre-Incarnation & since His Incarnation, being careful though to not use this convention in the cases wherein unbelievers are quoted, for, obviously, they being unbelievers means they are not thinking of Him as being the Almighty, especially in the NT wherein He in the form of the Christ was rejected either as an imposter or as nothing more than a mere human teacher; likewise, open & closed quotation marks to indicate the beginning & the end of each individual being quoted would be helpful; etc).
But this guitarflame79 fellow is just biased against the KJV & is evidently on a campaign to descredit it entirely & that is a serious problem, one that indicates that something quite questionable, to say the least, is afoot!
There is too many to list. It would take too long to list them all but I'll give you one, "Easter" should have been translated "Passover" in Acts.
The Premier study Bible in a center column note agrees with the NKJV in Gen 22,17. Desendants for seed.
See verse 18 in the NKJV.
Strongs # H668 in Songs 3:9 is Palanquin. The NKJV is much more accurate here than the KJV. Please look up that word in the Hebrew.
But if ease of reading is the justification for the NKJV, why obfuscate?
@@NewLifeOfAlbanyGa Accuracy > "obfuscation"
What is a Palanquin?
How old was Ahab when be became king according to KJV?
"The Holiness of the KJV for a Holy people" ?? What?
Long story. Basically, the holier a people become, God entrusts them with His Word. God bless!
At 5:11 -6 this is very misleading. When the word seed clearly refers to descendants of plural then the NKJV translates it as descendants but Gen 22:18 which is what Paul is quoting in Gal the NKJV uses Seed clearly showing the Promises fulfilled in Christ.
I read both the kjv and the nkjv.
Which one you like the most?
King James Bible
Frank.
God looks upon those bibles as an abomination. He said not to add to or take from His word. Revelation 22:18.
@@judyswiderski2682 Then go read it in Greek and Hebrew. I guarantee you won't though.
Which Hebrew and Grrek manuscripts o na.rss one.
You sound like my dad, who taught the Bible for 65 years. He liked the King James, but was disappointed with the New King James. He was very careful of the theological significance of Bible wording and trembled before the Word of God.
Thanks God for your life and ministry Pastor for shedding light on this very important subject. May you continue to share this wisdom all the more! Although there are poor bible translations out there, there are servants like you that could help us to better understand the scriptures by the help and guidance of the Holy Ghost. Glory to God!
I do hope and pray that Pastors and Bible teachers explain the pure word of God we all read from various languages from the original Hebrew and Greek and Aramaic language so we could really understand what God actually said from the original tongues.
the nkjv relies on the alexandrian text you need to find the Cambridge pure Edition King James Bible that goes off the antioch text , the alexandrian school is the one that stoned Steven in acts 8.
HELLO? ANYBODY HOME? HUH?
Sir, you do not believe Act 2:38. The Text teaches Repent followed by baptism results in remission of sins. Why do you teach Repent brings salvation followed by baptism? KJV or NKJV. Salvation comes after baptism.
I do not
Sounds like you might be a little bit Pentecostal
If I were to use my handy-dandy pen or pencil in my Holman NKJV Study Bible and make the many corrections, many of which are trivial at best, such as the difference between "devils" and "demons," would this be sufficient?
Well, it’d help. But many are not trivial. There is nothing accidental or incidental in the Word. Thank you for watching! God bless,
Devils are fallen angels, as is described in the KJB Bible; the devil and his angels, which are devils. He hath a devil is someone possessed of a fallen angel. Demon comes from the SECULAR Greek, "daemon", which is a spirit (could be wicked or good). Demon originates from paganism. So it is from mythology. Not the same as biblical devil in which the KJB describes.
Simarily, many modern versions use Hades in the place of hell. Hades is not the same place as hell. Hades, again, comes from secular/pagan Greek mythology. Hades can be a not-so-bad place, unlike hell. (The river Styx flows through Hades).
Modern versions do not update English so much as they claim, however they are weaving in more natural, secular and pagan words into the Bible. These constitute doctrinal changes, however subtle they may be.
How does this occur? It is the manuscripts they use being touted as the oldest, so they must be the best. Also, Hebrew and Greek Lexicons. Greek Lexicons were first written to decipher the Greek mythology, philosophers, plays, science, etc; like Philo, Plato, Socrates, Hypocrates, etc. Afterwards they were used (plagiarized/compiled) to decipher the Bible. (you can research that). So, that is why you find so many secular definitions included in Greek and Hebrew in the back of Strong's Concordance. No other Lexicons are any better. They are not reliable sources for study or to find truth. The KJB words fit the context and make perfect sense as it is.
@@brianhaley4471 that's illiteracy. There is ONLY one devil.
Please read your Bible
@Van Guard @Van Guard none of what you are saying is true. You believe liberal, unbelieving scholars and commentators over the Bible. Daemon is secular Grk word not biblical grk. Devil is English for fallen Lucifer and his angels.
The Greek work hades is a temporal place in Greek mythology, and an eternal place in the Bible...because the context dictates it and the translators knew that it was. Several prior English bibles also translate hades as hell as well as the KJB.
Hades is a transliteration and Hell is a translation into English of what the word means.
Hell is a place of eternal punishment made for the devil and his angels, and enlarged to accommodate his human followers...to be cast into the lake of fire. The teutonic word hel is from the tectonic language and pagan beliefs, not tbe same as the Bible. Many words in all languages have different meanings. When it comes to dead Hebrew and Greek, are we supposed to buy scholars cleaver claims that translators had ulterior motives because they tranlated a word differently in various passages? Obviously, there is context right in the surrounding verses within a passage. Elohim is plural to describe God's majesty and also singular to describe the Aaron's golden calf as a god. So Elohim can rightly be traslated God and god in English. Btw, as a recent language made up several other languages, English has more words than Hebrew and Greek.
God preserved his word throughout Hebrew, Greek, Aramaic, Latin and culminating in English. Two streams of manuscripts make up the kjv and all modern bibles. The kjv agrees with 6,000+ mss and modern versions are based on mostly 2 out of 5. The 5 are what most all modern scholars promote. That doesn't mean they're true. They are the most corrected, corruptions that no one denies, yet because they are believed to be the oldest that somehow makes them the best...based on a hypothesis that only the originals are inspired. This is totally opposite what the Bible/kjv says because they are based on totally different texts.
@@paulrobinson9318 No that is correct early modern English, not illiteracy.
There is one devil named Satan who has lesser devils under him. Satan is just the chief devil.
Lucifer, now Satan, was an arch angel. A third of God's angels flowed Lucifer in his rebellion. They are all angels; now are all devils. My bible says devils. What is the problem with that?
We should allow the Bible correct us, not find fault with the Bible.
Just because it’s different, doesn’t mean it’s wrong. 🧐
I agree
Only one is the Word of God , the other is the word of Satan , different is the opposite of the Same , God never gave us 2 separate manuscripts , only one , and only one is His true Word .
@@nzbrotrev9028 There are many manuscripts. The oldest ones are fragments, that often don't even agree with each other. There's no such thing as an "original manuscript" of any biblical book that exists anywhere in the world that we know of. The oldest we have were written hundreds of years after the original writing.
@@RevBRV I agree with that statement , but only one is the Word of God , the other is Antichrist, we can't have two separate (different) Bibles .
Sample of why I don't ont care for the new translations.
NIV , ESV both say , Elhanan killed Goliath 2 Samuel 21 v 19 , that is a lie , we both know it was David , 1 Samuel 17 v 51 .
We could find a million fragments of Manuscripts , but if they contradict what God has said , we should reject the them .
Isn't the new King James version mostly a new translation and not a revision of the King James version which has the last one in 1769 as I think it says on Google?
Yes
NKJV uses Christian technical vocabulary, for scholarly Christians. I keep going back to KJV, because it seem to be an easier read than NKJV. However, I was saved through reading the old NIV.
Me too, I drew closer to God in Heaven and he drew closer to me, I am so humbled for the ability to study King James. Praise God
Dont' matter which Bible you use to be saved, but the Bible is like a trojan horse. you get the mesage of salvation in every one but some minor things can affect doctrine and lead you astray..
I know you did a brief review of the MEV. Could you revisit the MEV since it is the only TR version (besides the KJV and NKJV, of course) ?
Thanks for the suggestion. I may do that!
Read the verse in the MEV where a woman says blessed is the womb that bare the and the paps thou sucked and Jesus says yea rather blessed are those hear the Word of God and keep it. It's in Luke 11. MEV mangles it and makes it look like Mary worship. Such a disappointment
New King James Version Of The Bible does away with the "Comforter". The Comforter is the cornerstone of Jesus' teaching and to take it out is Blasphemy. Mankind is still in its infancy and is not meant to know all the answers at this time.
I have also noticed the nkjv replaces the word evil with calamity.
it sounds the same, but is it? I looked it up: evil seems to being the opposite of good and wickness. While calamity is when you have a great loss... those are two differnt words... hmmmm, stick with KJV.
While I agree with you on many points, it must also be pointed out that the original King James did not have the benefit of the Greek and Hebrew translations, that are widely available today. There was also a lot of bias from King James who also forced on the scribes when writing the translations into English from the Latin. The King forced the scribes to omit certain words and reinforce others. While watching your video I also followed along on biblegateway.com and was able to do a side by side comparison, and also include NASB and ESV. I prefer the KJV, then the NKJV which has the best of both the KJV and the Greek and Hebrew, without the Influence of King James as we watched over the scribes. Dr. James White has done extensive research and concluded the KJV was completely under the influence of KJ himself and not exactly Literal in its translation. Just keep an open mind and do your own research. Againt KJV only people assume that the King James is perfect, but it is not and in light of new information about KJV and its scribes, and that Revelation was a paraphrase because the scribes of King James didnt have the original manuscripts for Revelations ( only bits and pieces), but were forced to go to print, should leave some room for doubt.
Not sure I follow your “argument” when referring to seed being singular by Paul as scripture in Mark 4:26 refers to seed (not “a seed”) as seed (plural) being cast into the ground. Please explain how “seed” is necessarily singular.
In Galatians 4 Paul says it is seed, singular, not seeds plural. Yet the NKJV translates the Ot passage Paul is referring to as plural, descendants. Inspired Paul knew Greek better than the NKJV translators. It’s a prophecy of Messiah.
I Love my NKJV, only Bible I read
I was there one time myself. Read it from cover to cover.
And I'm sure you are full of & exhibit its errors, Christian Lives Matter // Crews.
@@fiery.mercaba
The NKJ is a vast improvement over the KJ - BUT BOTH come from corrupted catholic texts - and neither should be considered an accurate representation of God's revelation. They are a diminishing concession to tradition and Catholicism.
See my other post I addressed to you a few minutes ago,@@paulrobinson9318 , for it also adequately answer this post of yours here.
@@paulrobinson9318 lol so which should we use???
Hello Pastor Waldron, what bible is it that you use? The Cambridge? Thank you!
Cambridge Large Print Text only. God bless!
what original notes? most of the "notes" in the gutter columns are reference's with other scripture and short explanations of hebrew or greek words @Nick-wn1xw
As I sat here tonight I prayed to God for guidance & He lead me to this video. I am forever thankful for your obedience to God & doing this video, because I would have traded my KJV for a NKJV. 🤦🏽♀️ THANK YOU, LORD!!!
Blessings to you my brother in Christ. 😇
You are blessed. I used the NKJV for many years. Some parts of it bothered me, like John 1:3, made through him instead of made by him. Wish I had known years earlier. I went through testing and found the words of man do not have the power of the word of God. Blessings.
@@judyswiderski2682 You are decieved.
Neither conveys the accurate meaning of the Greek fully.
Some Greek concepts do NOT translate into English clearly.
You are attempting to define the actions of the infinite timeless Godhead in finite terms which is impossible.
Nor can the mind if man or the language of man express creation adequately.
Neither is fully accurate.
Both are at best approximations.
Thank and Bless you for all the presentations diligently posted.
Can I inquire, do you know why so many preachers are pushing so hard to get people to leave the KJV?
Not sure
@@NewLifeOfAlbanyGa God bless you Pastor, this knowledge is needed by such thirsty Christians today being deceived by these modern demonations.(I know that's not a word, you understand)
I was trying to talk to a Facebook teacher today about changes that affect doctrine and his reply to me was the doctrine is a word created by the Catholic Church. I literally broke down into tears. There is no talking to so many so-called pastors and teachers today and I see a version of the Bible in the future being created that will be completely ecumenical without offending anyone.
If people do not understand that everything real was created in, by, for and through Christ as the Word as the cornerstone and foundation of our faith, and that he is Truth, and that all we can count on especially today is the Truth of the scriptures... there will come a time that they will have nothing to turn to if they have not loved and sought the Truth.
@@soundimpact4633 *_God Bless_*
@@soundimpact4633 Doctrine is in the Bible, that’s for sure.
Thank you for this Video Pastor. I have all the Translations. I was actually looking up the verses you mentioned in the Fire Bible (ESV) -- 😮. That face is the face I have with many Translations. However, I let the Holy Spirit bring to my remembrance what he has taught me. I grew up using the King James Version, but do enjoy comparing Translations. I may only have a few NKJV Bibles ~ one of which is Charles Stanley's Life Principles Bible (but I have his other Translations as well -- ESV and NASB). It truly makes a difference if the Word of Truth is not in the Readers spirit. But the Holy Spirit is very much capable of cutting through ignorance. God bless! ♥️🌄
Amen!
Anyone looking to see any errors in any translation should be looking at the real Bible, The Greek and Hebrew texts, not comparing it to another English translation. There are errors in the King James Bible. The translators did a very good job but they made mistakes. They were not inspired. Nor did they claim to be inspired. I still use the KJV but I also use the newer formal translations. The NKJV, The NASB, and the ESV are all incredible translations of the true Greek and Hebrew Bible. We have 5,800 Greek New Testament texts. Nobody can claim, without ignorance or intellectual dishonesty, that the KJV doesn’t have mistakes. There are verses in the KJV that actually weaken the argument for the Deity of Christ when compared to all of the other formal translations.
The KJV only cult are full of double standards and wilful ignorance and dishonesty
This KJV Only review was more intelligent than all the others on RUclips. Most of the others are done by morons who use idiotic ideology. I love the KJV for many of the same reasons that you do.
I still would love you to do an updated review on the KJVER.
Amen! I’ll try
+ Charles Doyle
Just WHY would you love a corrupted and archaic text when there are so many accurate and honest translations today that are NOT the result of a Catholic theologian and a sodomite kings' rules . . .
Makes NO sense to me that a Christian wanting to hear the Words of GOD would even accept anything coming through those filters.
"This KJV Only review was more intelligent than all the others on RUclips. Most of the others are done by morons who use idiotic ideology. I love the KJV for many of the same reasons that you do."
Have you already wrote any books I like to read them
Getting there.
@@NewLifeOfAlbanyGa I want one. Sooners you get it 😃
KJV is hard for me to understand but I respect it. I use the ESV or NIV.
Stay with and study the KJB , the rest aren't front God , God will never lie.
@@nzbrotrev9028 God does not lie so true. But the KJV only cult lie to try and justify the KJV only deception
@@samlawrence2695 Both can't be right , only one is from God , the other a cursed , a false gospel.
@@nzbrotrev9028 How are modern translations cursed when God is using and blessing them to bring many to Christ. Born again of the Spirit of God. Loving the Lord Jesus Christ, unlike the KJV only cult the fruit of the Spirit is evident. If you were a Bible believer instead of a KJV idolater. You would know that "it is by their fruit that you know them" Not what translation of scripture you read. The fruit of the KJV only cult is absolute poison. Full of hypocrisy, double standards and outrageous lies. Calling the word of God cursed because it is not the idol you worship. Is close to blaspheming the Holy Spirit. How can Satan cast out Satan? You sound very much like false teacher and KJV only heretic the Jack Hyles. Again showing how vile and demonic the KJV only cult that Satan has raised up really is. No doctrine is changed in the modern more accurate translations that God has blessed us with. Not one despite your delusions and fantasies. The NIV the translation that Satan hates most, therefore the KJV only cult hates most. Is far stronger on the deity of Christ and the Holy Spirit than your idol the KJV. Also the KJV translators knew their work was not perfect. They said that even the meanest translation is still the word of God. The KJV only cult in their delusions pride and arrogance think they know better. KJV onlyism is an indefensible unbilical Christ dishonouring cancer from the pit of hell.
I read the KJV fairly exclusively and love your videos in defense of it. However, you made a point that I didn't quite understand. Many years ago I had done a word study on the English word "judge" used in the New Testament and had found out at that time that there were 3 Greek words that were all translated as "judge" in the English. One of them was used in the verse where it says to "judge righteous judgement", and I found that the Greek word used there carried a meaning of discernment. Then there was the word judge in the verse that used to say "judge not lest ye be judged" that has now supernaturally changed to "judge not that ye be not judged", and that Greek word carried the sense of "condemn". So I looked further into the word "condemn" at the time and found that it's basically sending someone to hell, damnation. The root of the word is "com", that means "with" and the word "damnare" or as we use it now, damn. So condemn by its root means the exact same thing as damn. So I don't understand the insistence on making the word condemn mean less than that.
I appreciate your reply. I will attempt to look into it. thank you!
I threw my NKJV in the trash and i dont regret it. Not being boastful but I was that angry having a corrupted bible. I had an NIV also that a gave away... should have thrown that one out too but I gave it away before I knew it was a terrible translation.
You should look up the general editor notes on his experence while making that book.
2 Timothy 3:16.
"All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness:"
It says ALL scripture. Not everyone in our modern English can understand the KJV. I am am saying that it is not accurate. Jusy not clear to most people today English has evolved so far to words having additional as well as separate meanings. The NASB is supposed to be a more accurate translation word to word. Even above KJV. I feel that all of them can be and should be used.
Perhaps first watch:
"The New American Standard Bible Updated NASBU Compared To The KJV"
*_God Bless_*
They have to change the scripture by 20% to have it copyrighted. Too bad. Glad the KJV is public domain.
The KJV still has a copyright in the UK. But what has copyright to do with accuracy? Another lame argument from the KJV only cult.
@@martinbaker7032 Publishers have to change the text by 20% to get their copyright so they can make more $$$ So much for add and take away from scripture. The Textus receptus is the compilation of the most matching copies (6000) from all over the world vs the Critical text which is about 100 non-matching copies from Alexandria. I'm fine with any Bible accurately translated from the Textus receptus.
ruclips.net/video/Gb67KvD8LRk/видео.html
The NKJV is far superior to the KJV.
On the back cover of the NKJV Parallel Bible they claim that it is best transition Bible..
Transitioning from the KJV to " modern translations"........
Why????
There are resources to investigate the differences at Chick publications and several videos that you would benefit from hearing
@@sherrieflynn252 Chick Publication is a propaganda website for KJV-only heresy
@@MaiaGothmog
I consider the facts as well as the source
Do you?
SO you claim the KJB translators were looking at the BIG picture and understood that Paul's use of SEED and the promise of GOD to Abraham being seed meant the KJB had a better and more unified view than the NKJB (Which I have no love for) yet the LKJB committees could NOT agree on Passover vs Easter which is an OBVIOUS no-brainer - Easter didn't exist in the first century, so the Gospel writers could NOT possibly have used it?
IN any event - SEED in old English is both singular and plural - Gen 13:16 - SEED is described as the dust of the earth - hardly a singular. The HEBREW is PLURAL. Your interlinear will use DESCENDANTS as the ONLY available translation.
"17 ¶ And it came to pass, that, when the
sun went down, and it was dark, behold a smoking furnace, and a burning
lamp that passed between those pieces. 18 In the same day the LORD made a
covenant with Abram, saying, Unto thy seed have I given this land, from the river of Egypt unto the great river, the river Euphrates:
Again we see SEED is plural and can honestly and BEST be translated DESCENDENTS - SEED is a plural word in this case. SO we see ikt used BOTH as a singular and plural - making decendents the rational choice in English.
17 ¶ And it came to pass, when the sun went down and it was dark, that
behold, there appeared a smoking oven and a burning torch that passed
between those pieces. 18 On the same day the LORD made a covenant with
Abram, saying: “To your descendants I have given this land, from the river of Egypt to the great river, the River Euphrates- (New KJV)
I’ve done teaching on Easter.
Yes, the KJV Translators considered the OT when translating the NT. Just like virgin in Isaiah 7:14.
I’ve done many, many videos on the subject.
+New Life Of Albany Ga.
SO then do you admit using Easter in Acts was a sloppy error demonstrating that the various committees did NOT coordinate well?
And as a second part - should they not have translated accurately WITHOUT reference to their theology? The Bible is SUPPOSED to be a record of the words GOD gave, translated into any particular language - without the theological intervention of the translators and their relevant theology.
EG the KJ names the writers of the gospels as Saint so and so - NOT anywhere found in the early Bibles. Isn't this a man-made corruption?
Is manipulating the scriptures apart from what GOD gave by revelation is OK?
@@paulrobinson9318 I don't agree with the use of Passover in the disputed verse for this reason. Passover wasn't on the 15th day. The 15th day marked the beginning of a period of days known as the Feast of Unleavened Bread.
@@paulrobinson9318 You said that I read and defend the KJV. Both of those accusations are false. My disagreements with the KJV adding Easter to their Bible and with the input of Passover in that text in other Bibles are based strictly on biblical evidence.
@@paulrobinson9318 I read up on this and found a great breakdown on when and how Passover/Feast of Unleavened Bread became synonymous with one another. I stand corrected.
www.cgg.org/index.cfm/fuseaction/Library.CGGWeekly/ID/741/Is-Passover-on-First-Day-Unleavened-Bread-Part-One.htm
KJV language from 1611 is just too out of date to be useful. Lots of new translations of the textus receptus and majority text are obviously more useful.
colonyofcells iamamachine, that is a statement of opinion & not opinion based on anything substantial.
For whom is your post intended, @@kingston163? Let's start with that.
+@@fiery.mercaba
SO is yours - the problem he is correct, and you are simply pumping vain man-made tradition.
"colonyofcells iamamachine, that is a statement of opinion & not opinion based on anything substantial."
I cannot believe what I am hearing from you sir... Have you read the context of these passages you are raising issues against in the NKJV, as well as the Strong's definitions of the words the KJV had, that the NKJV actually puts them in proper context? And I am saddened that you do not believe in eternal security.
We should stick with KJV that was written by 50 well known scholars in its day
@@tpham7632 NKJV is pretty good too.
@DrWitnesser who needs forgiveness?
@DrWitnesser I've matured in my faith over the past year and agree with what you have said. We can only take hold of eternal security if we have truly repented.
@@JerichoLeon
NKJV a deadly translation. NKJV counterfeit
NKJV a fraud
The New king James and all good modern translations are stronger on the deity of Christ, where as the KJV is much weaker in Titus 2:13. The KJV gives two persons in view when it should only be one person in view. (KJV) " of the great God and our Saviour Jesus Christ " ( modern translations) " our great God and Savior Jesus Christ ". I could list a lot more but I won't for sake of time.
I understand. I intend on going into more detail on that in the future. God bless!
I agree with you on the verses you quoted, I was just pointing out that the King James is not perfect, no translation is perfect.
I agree, One reason I like using the NASB translation is the marginal notes which gives manuscript info. The NASB is my preferred translation.
+ guitarflame79
Precisely and exactly. The KJ translators were unaware of many of the rules of KOINE Greek - they said so themselves, and so restricted their translation to classical Greek from the 1200's - 6 corrupted incomplete Greek texts (and a LOT of conjecture) is what the KJ is based on, via Catholic theologian Erasmus.
IT was factually false that the translators "revised and compared" the KJ to the original texts - I wonder HOW they got away with that false statement?
The Graham Sharpe rule is where the newer tets get their strengthened support for BOTH the deity of Christ and the Trinity - the JWs and the KJB agree that Christ is savior but NOT God.
The "trinity" is a fairy tale, @@paulrobinson9318, & that you endorse it is like embarrassing mud on your face in this venue to those who know what mud looks like.
So which one is the most accurate and doesn’t contradict nor take out verses among the newer translations?
KJVer, Akjv, MEV, nkjv
@@NewLifeOfAlbanyGa can I get those in book form anywhere? Leather?
@@Qhther Christian book or Amazon