Mike, I found your channel a couple of months ago and now I listen daily. I fashion myself a budding apologist and my faith and resolve to defend the Gospel have been bolstered by your ministry. Thank you so much, Brother!
Jehovahs Witnesses dive into this on their website because people claim their Bible is false. I would say their Bible is the most accurate based on this video and what JW claim.
I just learned about this from a non christian and honestly I was heart broken. Jesus is my everything and the bible is all I have. Honestly this video brings so much context and comfort knowing what these changes are and how God preserved His Word ❤️.... Thank you Jesus 🙏🏾🙏🏾🙏🏾❤️❤️❤️. Im keeping this video in my pocket to help others.
"Jesus is my everything and the bible is all I have" (I think you need a hobby, join a club or something that does useful stuff, get off your lazy arse and do something)
The Bible only tells stories,accuracy I wouldn’t think so. They are allegories.if you know what that is. You can not prove much that written in the Bible. Too many chances, bad translation, errors. Siniaticus has 27,000
@@BrockJamesStory if you read the Bible enough you will see cracks, it’s only stories which all three religions of Abraham that has con and enslave mankind, too many people think that this is a perfect but it has so many errors. And the Koran is so violent, and how sane is the people that think of a flying horse, a flying chariot, stopping the sun is reality are only think about death with a vision of heaven and paradise. Insane is what this is. And where does accuracy come in? The Bible is a allegory taking names if they ever exist and making a story out them, being more fiction than fact.
Thank you so much for posting this video. I grew up KJVO but I've come to the conclusion that if I believe the claims made by KJVO proponents that all other translations are corrupted with ill intent I would have to pridefully disregard people who teach from or accept translations such as NIV. Your video has helped me understand what the differences really are.
It’s certainly the most beautiful English translation but you are absolutely right that we should embrace most (not all!) other versions as we can learn a lot from them
Timotheos Pontius hey bro...you are great. Thx for comments on KJVO debate. I have question as to why you have ‘experienced based ‘ videos. Lonnie etc. Quizz8ng not complaint...
Personally, I always had a hard time understanding KJV, as it is wrote in old English. I didn't start actually reading the Bible, until I discovered the NIV & ESV versions.
Just wanted to say THANK YOU! This is something I have had discussions with non believers about and I have severely lacked understanding in this area. I am so grateful to have this broken down and to help put to rest doubts that i have also had. God bless you, your family and ministry Mike!
Pastor Winger your channel is exactly the type of thoughtful and honest Bible exploration and explanation I've been seeking for years! Where is your church?
+Vaughn ONeal Hi Vaughn! Our church website is www.hosannachapel.org I actually teach the youth (jr high and high school) during our normal services and the studies I upload to RUclips are generally from a Sunday evening service (for all ages) at 5pm. If, in God's providence, you happen to be able to attend then please come up and introduce yourself to me. God bless you!
Dan Wallace says that the best earliest Greek manuscripts have the mark of the beast as 616, not 666. So we have the neighbor of the beast, no big deal.
for those disheartened by the probability their favorite verse is a later addition remember this verse wasn't. John 21:25 Now there are also many other things that Jesus did. Were every one of them to be written, I suppose that the world itself could not contain the books that would be written.
@@ethanhocking8229 Thanks for your questions. I'm not a scholar but I don't believe there are any (known) manuscripts of John that don't include chapter 21. However, manuscripts are only one form of evidence. Don't forget that our oldest manuscripts are dated to the second century. In the case of John that's a single credit-card sized fragment called P52 (which I believe includes a section of the story of the woman caught in adultery -- which we know is a later insertion). Our oldest complete manuscripts are dated to the third or even the fourth centuries. In the decades and centuries that passed between the gospels and epistles being written and the earliest copies we have of them, they could have been changed many times. I believe they were. Scholars use various forms of textual criticism to consider such potential changes. I am personally convinced that John 21 is a later addition and am happy to share some of the arguments with you if you like. I also believe that John 15-17 is an insertion.
@@ethanhocking8229 I just heard from Dr Robert M Price that there is one manuscript of John that doesn't include chapter 21. He says that was the clincher for him in determining that the final chapter is a later addition (of a gospel that is already a mishmash of material).
@Martin ramsbottom And what is in non-canonical gospels doesn't mean Jesus didn't say or do those things. And what is in canonical gospels (earlier or later additions) doesn't mean Jesus did say or do those things. We don't know what Jesus said and did because we weren't there.
Pastor Winger, I am so grateful for you sharing your WEALTH of knowledge! It has helped me recently with determining 'the right' translation (surprise, there is none lol). I follow your channel and learn so much, but it inspires me to dig deeper into the scripture as well! Thank you for your hard work and study. It has been an interesting study for me learning the history of the Textus Receptus and the New Greek Testament (Novus Testament Greace), as well as the differences and basis for them.
I was lost for 30 years. Wasn’t raised in the church. Just lost and following my heart. My heart lead me to the ugly destruction of my own life and the lives of others. I’m so grateful that The Lord saved me, even after so long. I’m thankful He gave me His Word, and I’m thankful He gave me brothers and sisters and pastors like Mike who helped me to understand things I struggled with. Thank you for what you submit to The Lord doing through you, Brother. He gets the glory. You have my thanks.
"You have to wait for your heart, to catch up with your head" I have absolutely found that to be true. These days, I have to keep my head from despising the added text! (Calm thyself, beating heart.) EXCELLENT SERIES !! Nice "parable" with the 1000 Truck Tires ~ (My condolences to the Snake Handlers here in Texas)
Excellent presentation! I pray and hope for this truth may make impact on younger generation who are being brainwashed by sceptics so that they may see the truth you knew and explained exceptionally well. May God redeem our time and the generation, may His kingdom come. God bless you brother. You have nicely defended the truth and protected the believers from being sidetracked or being caught by surprise.
@Creeping Death lm sorry bro, I didn't mean to be so harsh. The bible was written for the wrong reasons, the whole religion was infiltrated all to corrupt the real Holy Scriptures and fool people. People need to wake up in a hurry
Yes Mr Winger, I totally agree with you that we Christians ought to know more than what is in the Bible - its history, its source, the innumerable manuscripts to substantiate etc. Thank you so much for making the effort to enlighten us Christians. May God bless you richly in your service for Him.
The first problem I have is the effeminate nature of how mike winger conducts himself, this alone is disturbing. Mike talks about the originals, I like for him to show WHERE are these originals? Is he talking about the codex Sanaticus and Vaticanus being older? Who told him this and why would he believe them? Mike is not specific at all, just a broad brush preaching that he learned from joel osteen. Appealing to falible men like James White and Dan Wallice as authority to tell us that the bible is NOT absolutely true but that we can be 95% confident in reading as many bibles as we want because they dont teach false doctrine? Right mike, is this what you want us to believe? So the reason for hundreds of DIFFERENT so called christian denominations is because of interpretation? Has it ever come to mind that maybe the reason people believe in false doctrine is because they are reading false bibles? James White book KJOC??? What has anybody learn from reading this mike?
Thanks pastor Mike you addressing important issues and you are right we need to hear it first from honest people who care about us like you, its enlightning and enchoring my faith in God more . Im looking forward to the different translations discussion, interesting. Thank you keep the great work up my pastor
This video was fantastic Mike and this topic is so important for believers and skeptics to understand. Thank you for doing all of the research and studying, your effort and passion is much appreciated!!!
Great video as usual, Mike :) I'd like to add the interpolation of the angels stirring the water was after an original verse which says the waters stirred or moved. So it's likely a tradition that began and was carried on to explain why the waters moved seemingly in a supernatural way.
I just want to say thank you so very much for this information. I wrote EVERYTHING down. You have helped me so much with this information. I greatly appreciate all your hard work. May the Lord continue to bless you and your family.
Oh man! That last part when he says "actually mom did you know..." I've done that several times thanks to you! And thanks to God who gave you the knowledge!
I'm glad I found this video. It enlightens my understanding concerning my views of versions. However, I will continue to use my KJV. I just like the way it reads.
Thank you for the hard work you're doing to make every of your videos. My family and I live in Ukraine. When the argument with an unbeliever (who doesnt speak or understand English ) starts there is no source in russian/ukrainian books/channels i can find to refer to. I wish there was a chance for russian speaking side of the planet to think biblically with your help, Mike. Thank you again for your time and loyalty. God bless you!
Mike, the three tires aren't even flat, they are just leaking air and can be replaced by the spare tires you ALREADY own! ❤ I wish my church would teach on these things, every time I attempt to bring apologetic content to my church I get the stink eye, it makes me wonder if I shouldn't move to a different church because I feel like apologetics is my gift and my gift is not benefiting the congregation I'm a part of because they don't seem open to utilizing it, which makes me sad. If you have any words of wisdom for me I'm all ears! Peace and love in Christ brother!
Great job Mike. I watched this with my teenage son who thoroughly enjoyed your research and well organized presentation. I have looked into this issue years ago myself and remembered a piece of very significant evidence in support of both the Mark and John sections being inspired scripture. It is the work of Ivan Panin the Mathematician. He was an agnostic with no time for "the word of God". However, one day he looked at it with his Mathematical brain and was stunned to discover number patterns that were in the underlying Greek and Hebrew Canon (both Greek and Hebrew letters can be read as numbers as well). He found that scripture had the Seal of God on it, the number 7. He spent 50 years of his life after giving his Life to Christ examining this pattern in scripture and finding it everywhere. I highly recommend you google his name and look at his books. I think his evidence would have been a perfect addition to your series here. Without leaving you in suspense he found that both those sections of scripture (Mark and John) had the pattern of the surrounding chapters and had many features that were all divisible by 7. Anyone who has never heard of this should go look it up, you will be amazed. It makes sense that the Holy Spirit would leave an irrefutable mark on His work. (Chuck Missler had a few presentations that are still on RUclips talking about the work of Panin).
it kills me that people scoff and ridicule the bible knowing it has so many copies and very few differences. yet some of the most cherished secular writings from the ancient past have some hardly at 50 copies, and people treat them as 100 percent genuine.
Pastor Mike... I LOVE your channel and your deep dives. I'm going to watch every video! However, I think you may have gotten the history of the Pericope Adulterae wrong. You said it's not mentioned until the 10th century and doesn't show up in the Bible until the 14th. The sources I'm seeing say it's MUCH earlier. Vaticanus doesn't have it but the Latin Vulgate produced by Jerome (300s) does. It's mentioned by Didymus in the 300s, and Eusebius (300s) says that Papias (110 AD) mentioned it. Was that a mistake to say it arrived after the 10th century? This would lend much more credence to your (and Metzger's) assertion that it is historical and is an oral tradition that survived and was added to John. Thanks for all you do!
I think Mike may have made a mistake here and confused it with 1 John 5:7, as it does sound more in-line with the history of the Comma Johanneum (or 1 John 5:7 in the KJV, NKJV, MEV). But yeah, you're right in that church fathers in the 300s did discuss it, including St Augustine.
Thank you brother. I know as an unbeliever I quoted some of this stuff, corruption of text etc After meeting our Saviour and reading His precious word I was blown away by the truth and Jesus is truth and He set me free. Of course after awhile I fell for the council of Nicea rubbish that's getting around and a dear friend has too, still is unfortunately. But after studying scripture and seeking God in prayer, (for once I knew the truth I didn't want to be deceived), for me it simply came down to faith in God. That His timeless Sovereignty and His power would never allow His scriptures or His beloved Sons name to ever be corrupted, it was easy to accept. I love learning more and more about Him and just how everything in the Bible, in history, everything is in His Wonderful hands. So exciting. For me to say "Well I just believe" is good enough for me but doesn't help me defend the faith adequately. So thank you very much for your time and research it has blessed me 😁🌈🙌❤️
Thank you for the video series. As you said, Some manuscripts do not include 7:53-8:11; you eluded to but for those taking notes here is a little more specifics, others add the passage here or after 7:36 or after 21:25 or after Luke 21:38, with variations in the text
As to the variation at I John 5:7, there is very early evidence of its existence in the original Greek text given its apparent quotation by Cyprian in the early 200's A.D., where he writes, ""Again, it is written of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit, 'And these three are one.'" (BTW, Excellent lecture!)
According to Metzger, he used the Old Latin text which doesn’t show any evidence of this text. It is thought he read it into the text because of heresies he was fighting at that time. Bible(.)org has an article on this written by Dan Wallace
I think it is important to consider that there was an Arian controversy for a century or more and it may have found its way of support among those in the Greek speaking world. Is it not possible that could have factored in why the CJ was not included ? I am just asking. Also, what do we make of all the quotes of the CJ by early church fathers ? It seems to me that it flows naturally, grammatically and especially spiritually. I would say if it is not included in any Greek manuscript before the 10th century than fine, do not include it. However if there is a question concerning wether that verse was quoted in writing as early as the second century and there is no definitive way of knowing for sure, than it isnt necessary to be so dogmatic either way.
@@jbjoeychic There is grounds for dogmatism. The Comma is of great doctrinal significance, as it appears to communicate the model of redemption, appears to correspond with parables/allusions in the Gospel, and has parallel in the type presented in 7 feast days described in the Torah.
RE: Mark 9:44, 46, 48. There is a school of thought that says Jesus did say it 3 times, and there was a reason for it, because of John 21:16-17, when Jesus asked Peter 3 times "Lovest thou me?"
One of the ways extra words and phrases were added was due to the scribes adding side notes in the margins of the manuscripts for clarity's sake. Then, later on, newer scribes thought they were actually part of the text and added them in.
That seems out of context with the procedural rules of the scribes back then until today. Would appreciate sources to verify. Thanks! Don't want either of us subscribing to a false report.
This was very helpful thank you! There is a lot of urban myth style stuff that floats around on this kind of stuff without any dissertation as it were.
Mike, will you be looking at the NAB translation also next week? I was reading the NAB while watching this video and the notes in the margin were saying the same things you were saying about the big three variations.
I'm pretty sure I will include it. There are far too many translations to include them all but I will do at least one of the Catholic translations (New Jerusalem Bible or the New American Bible) and I may include both. Though how much time I will have for each translation I cover is still something I haven't figured out. I pray I will have wisdom from the Lord in preparation.
Hi, Mike I recently found your channel. And must that your teaching is great. Love the in-depth way you tackle scripture. One question though on the Alexandrian text. (The earlier text) I have heard the argument that the text was greated by the Gnostics who did not believe in the Deity of Christ. Hence the difference with the received text (KJV) Also the new NKJV is taken from the earlier text. Can you please provide your thoughts? Yours in Christ.
He also failed to mention why Erasimus refused to use the Codecs Vaticanus. And failed to mention the strong evidence that the Codecs Siniaticus is a forgery. (Both deemed by Mike as 'older' manuscripts, and both used in most every translation of the 20th century)
Thank you thank you thank you.i just want to add..as a born again believer we have supernatural help..the holy spirit..we can also search multiple translations in seconds with are phone..any problems in our carnal mind ..I believe it we seek..we are required to seek..sad that we have more access to his word than ever but we read it less..what good is the best bible if we only pick it up on Sunday morning..thanks again...please come up with a short video. .to help us share it in Sunday school..preach bro you are doing great
The one I have been concerned about is the one about the lion and lamb changed to lion and wolf. The whole verse is different. That’s the one that got me down the rabbit hole.
John 7:53-8:11 is also the passage often used by self-justifying people to prevent Christians from accusing them of sinning. They say, "well, Jesus said 'I don't condemn you...' " without finishing the sentence "...go and sin no more." So they can't have it both ways.
The doctrine of the trinity was an add on itself. The original apostles never taught it and it wasn’t even accepted until 325 AD at the council of Nicaea
Do you still have a job bro? Awesome im so glad there is a church willing to handle these issue! I know you are (or at least think i know) you are continuist of charismatic. It seems that Mark 16:17 is the clearest passage to provethe gifts should have continued. My opinion is that if the longer ending of Mark was added later it actually proves even more th e gifts should have continued.
Regarding 55:05 -- Well, let's consider the position that Mark 16:9-20 is not part of the original text. Mark 16:9-20 is supported by over 99.5% of the extant Greek manuscripts of Mark; of all undamaged continuous-text Greek manuscripts of Mark 16, the text stops at the end of verse 8 in exactly two of them. That's it. So if one contends that 2 manuscripts out of 1,640 are right, and 1,638 are wrong, is it really that different to say that 1,640 out of 1,640 are wrong? Fee taught that I Cor. 14:34-35 is not original. NA28 teaches that no extant Greek reading in Second Peter 3:10 is original. They seem to be granting the skeptic's argument, at least in part.
Based on what we have I would offer this opinion. Most of the early copies were written on Codex (book form) and it is highly probable that if a part of the book were to be lost it would be the last page. You could even say the same thing with a scroll to be honest. I think it is very likely that very early in the manuscript tradition the long ending of Mark was lost completely. And the long ending we have now was most likely an attempt to replace what was lost. This mystery may never be solved but if we ever found a super early manuscript of Mark we might just find a longer ending no one has ever seen before. I think it is highly probable the original longer ending was lost. But I agree I don't think Mark ended where the earliest manuscripts indicate it ended.
Re: Kermit the Frog being elected president: With the choices of real people available, it is theoretically possible there could be a mass of people so fed up that they'd run a campaign for a write-in vote for Kermie.
Wow...between your series on supposed Bible contradictions and "the Bothers Karamazov" by Fyodor Dostoyevsky audiobook my RUclips hours are probably through the roof.
@Mike Winger can you please explain how we have all of these differences in manuscripts, “the big 3”, number discrepancies, and letter differences in the scripture but we also believe that the Bible is inerrant? How would we defend inerrancy when someone brings up any of these points?
The original bible (or the original autographs to be specific) are inerrant, anything other than those is technically not inerrant because the copyists are not under inspiration when they copy like the writers were when they first wrote. But still we have incredibly accurate bibles these days practically aside from nkjv and kjv
Romans 8:1 doesn’t give me the hope that it gives others. I can’t get past the 2nd part of verse one about those who don’t walk according to the flesh but the spirit. My Christian walk is so hard. I may not lust after women/look at things I aught not/but I have anger in me. I’ve been praying about it for a while. Yesterday was really bad. I’m just gonna get up, dust myself off and go and follow Christ again.
I was thinking ah dang I love the passage with the adulterous woman.. then when you said it was probably still historical I was so happy 😅💕 not to hold on to something that probably doesn’t belong in scripture but I am glad it probably happened! ❤️
Little is written about Jesus and his life. Every part of his ministry can't be recorded so I like to think Jesus saved many from stoning to death. After all he did save us all from an eternal death! The passage in John was a heart blow to me. It has ministered to me. But I only want the truth. Thank God for Mike's work!
@@motherelephant5537 Within the past 2 months I came across a teaching from Messianic rabbi Zev Porat who spoke about the passage in John. It actually convinced me that the account of the adulterous woman didn't end up by accident or chance in that specific location (John 8:1-11) but that God had planned it like this all along. Why? Because the context aligns perfectly with a statement from the Old Testament: In John 7:37 Jesus declares that he is the *spring of living water:* _"Let anyone who is thirsty come to me and drink. Whoever believes in me, as Scripture has said, rivers of living water will flow from within them."_ The _very next day_ (John 8:1-2) the pharisees test Jesus with the adulterous woman because they don't believe him nor his words. And what does Jesus do? He bends down and *writes on the ground.* Have you ever wondered, what Jesus wrote there into the dust? Jeremiah 17:13 reveals it: _"Lord, you are the hope of Israel; all who forsake you will be put to shame. Those who turn away from you will be _*_written in the dust_*_ because they have forsaken the Lord, _*_the spring of living water."_*
Re: 50:45 -- No other important variants other than the ones you covered here?! That is not the case. Luke 22:43-44. The Alexandrian reading in Matthew 27:49. John 9:38-39. Jude verse 5. And more.
This man is an absolute messenger of God. I don't want to praise the man, but the message is PHENOMENAL. Thank you SO MUCH for taking the stand & creating the ministry you're doing Mike. I can't begin to explain the to you how much your ministry has completely changed my life. I had SO many questions, but the first time I watched this series (currently watching the 4th time through) along with the "Jesus in the Old Testament" series it was like reaching the end of the movie Sixth Sense - EVERYTHING started connecting like fireworks, like lightning, like power lines that get a little too close in the storm... I've read the Bible all my life, but EVERYTHING I previously questioned or doubted has connected and it's just BOOM!! *MIC DROP* THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR YOUR MINISTRY!!!
Someone asked me the other day, "If we don't trust the Catholic Church at all, how can we trust the New Testament which was compiled and approved by a bureaucratic, post-Constantine Catholic Church." I gave them the information I know about how the counsels didn't choose the books but merely affirmed the letters that were already being widely circulated and removed those that were unauthenticated. What more would you say?
I'd also be asking them what was in the 50 Bibles Emperor Constantine commissioned in 331 and how did the people doing the copying know what to include?
Great series of talks but here you're not arguing about how God preserved His Word but about the v ltd & poor manuscript basis for the KJV. We now have a v clear understanding of what the autographs said and the modern translations reflect this. It is a sign of God's grace and supernatural provision that everything needful for salvation was preserved, even in such a poorly translated version as the KJV.
Nice review; however there are a few places I do wish you had addressed. - Titus 3:10,11 NKJV says a divisive man is a sinner, but yet we know Jesus caused division. - Many modern version leave off the "how" He died at 1 Cor 15:3. Isn't the fact that Christ bleed to death important? - Again the modern versions are confusing at Heb 3:16. Did all reject or only some? - At Gal 2:16 are we justified by our own personal faith in Christ which can ebb and flow or are we justified by the Faith of Christ? This is a most important doctrine dealing with salvation. If one is justified by one's personal faith, does one loose salvation if one's faith fails?
As for Titus 3:10, the Greek word is hairetikon, like a heretic, not divise in the way you are thinking. Plus, division is ok, but for the truth and that is what Jesus did, dividing right and wrong. As for 1 Corinthians, the word for died is apethanen. It doesn’t say anything about bleeding to death but we can assume that is how he died with how excruciating it was on that cross. As for Hebrews 3:16, the Greek says ou pantes, meaning not all. If not all we have to assume some at least did not reject. And for Galatians 2:16, the word in Greek is pisteOs. It means to have faith in or upon or to believe. We have faith in Christ and that is what saves us. It is not a boastful thing or a merited thing but the grace through our faith that saves not the works of the law. About losing salvation, i wouldn’t say the faith fails per se but you could fall back to your old life anytime so a maintenance of faith is definitely taught in the Bible, but not for earning salvation everyday but because you have salvation, Glory to God. God will not force us to have faith but the faith of a mustard seed (Matthew 17:20) is all it takes to really start this wonderful born again experience and sanctification process and journey in Christ. I pray this helped. God bless. Repent and trust in Jesus
1 John 5:7,8 has to be the biggest issue for KJV readers and for the sake of textual integrity. But, IHMO, the bigger issue is that the KJV translators didn't even provide a marginal note pointing out the questionable text; i.e., the Comma Johanneum. Erasmus commented about the Comma in his 3rd Greek edition's annotations, Stephanus commented about the Comma's lack of Greek witness in three of Greek mss he collated; Tyndale, Coverdale, Matthews, and the Great Bible marked v7 in parentheses. The KJV translators had access to all the aforementioned sources yet didn't leave any marginal comment like they did in Luke 17:36; i.e., "this verse is wanting in most of the Greek copies"
well Mike , i am following your speeches a long time now: could you point at any text in the New World Translation of Jehovah's witnesses , where they have corrupted the text of the bible ; and i dont mean just a different rendering but : have they left out or added texts?
In Colossians 1:16-17 the word "other" is added 4 times to twist the Bible into teaching that Jesus is a created being. This can be seen clearly in the Watchtower's own interlinear Bible (which I have a copy of). I intend to make a video about it in a month or so. Here is a plain example of addition to the text which can not be said to be caused by rendering. There is no word in the Greek which they are rendering "other", nor is there any implication in the Greek that "other" is somehow meant or assumed. The simplest explanation is that the men who made the NWT didn't want to allow Colossians to say what it said. They simply didn't like what the Bible taught about Jesus so they added the word "other" to change it.
As all other scriptures show that Jesus was the son of God and not God himself we have to distinguish in texts so that no confusion is there: Look! Also, there was a voice+ from the heavens that said: “This is my Son,+ the beloved,+ whom I have approved.”+ matthew 3 13 Now when he had come into the parts of Caes·a·reʹa Phi·lipʹpi, Jesus went asking his disciples: “Who are men saying the Son of man is?”+ 14 They said: “Some say John the Baptist,+ others E·liʹjah,+ still others Jeremiah or one of the prophets.” 15 He said to them: “YOU, though, who do YOU say I am?”+ 16 In answer Simon Peter said: “You are the Christ,+ the Son of the living God.”+ 17 In response Jesus said to him: “Happy you are, Simon son of Joʹnah,* because flesh and blood did not reveal [it] to you, but my Father who is in the heavens did. matthew 16 .+ 5 For even though there are those who are called “gods,”+ whether in heaven+ or on earth,+ just as there are many “gods” and many “lords,”+ 6 there is actually to us one God*+ the Father,+ out of whom all things are, and we for him;+ and there is one Lord,+ Jesus Christ,+ through whom all things are,+ and we through him. 1 cor 8 so if you would agree with the father than you would agree that Jesus is not almighty God himself ; that justifies the rendering of John 1 saying that Jesus was A GOD. Now what you dont see in collosians 1: is this :He is the image+ of the invisible+ God, the firstborn+ of all creation; WHY DOES IT SAY THAT CHRIST IS THE IMAGE OF GOD AND NOT GOD HIMSELF? Colossians underlines that Jesus was Gods son (the kingdom+ of the Son of his love, verse 13) so as Jesus is not God himself and he did not create nor himself nor God , he created all OTHER things.!! Other is used to make things clear and that is not without a reason: Nevertheless, give as gifts of mercy+ the things that are inside, and, look! all [other] things are clean about YOU.* 42 But woe to YOU Pharisees, because YOU give the tenth+ of the mint and the rue and of every [other] vegetable, but YOU pass by the justice* and the love of God! These things YOU were under obligation to do, but those other things not to omit. lets see what darby says: But woe unto you, Pharisees, for ye pay tithes of mint and rue and every herb, and pass by the judgment and the love of God: these ye ought to have done, and not have left those aside. you see what you get when you dont use OTHER ? IT should have said : these ye ought to have done, and not have left those [others] aside.
There is a varient that is almost entirely different to any bible (mainly because it was completely written by man and it shouldn't be considered a bible) its called the queer bible. Pretty sure i can stop explaining there.
Mike, my question is when a manuscript had a mistake the scribes considered the word of God so holy they didn’t destroy the copies that had the mistakes. So how do we know that some of these “differences“ that we find are not in fact scrolls that were discarded due to their mistakes?
The scribes typically corrected any mistakes they were aware of. Many of our manuscripts contain such corrections, whether by the original scribe or a later one.
Regarding 1 John 5:7 I remember hearing in a RUclips video that the very first time those additional phrases are seen are in a Latin translation in the fourth century. And it was in a sidebar comment, not in the text itself. Then at some point in time it got mixed into the text. Then it became accepted. I think the video was a Dan Wallace video but could be wrong.
I'm only 13 minutes in and if everything that Mike Winger is saying is true, well then, it's absolutely mind blowing that the bible was preserved this well. I honestly don't care so much how well the old testament was reserved sense everything I need to know as a Christian is in the New Testament. But I'd still like to see what changes occurred in the OT.
You should care much more about the old testament. If it weren't for the old testament, there'd be a lot less reason to believe all the things about Christ. He fulfilled over 300 messianic prophecies. Mathematician Peter Stoner calculated the probability of one man fulfilling just a small number, just 48 of them, to be 1 in 10 followed by 157 zeros. This is an astronomically unachievable task for any normal human being, and Christ didn't fulfill just 48. The law and prophets were speaking of Christ, so we should care about the old testament. The fact he fulfilled so many of the old testament prophecies shows he was from God and was a fulfillment of all the previous revelations from Him. It's important. That's why the new testament constantly quotes the old testament.
With the 5k+ manuscripts there are some 300k+ variants. The issue I have with Nesstle-Aland and Westcott-Hort is I do not necessarily agree with their premise. The first premise is that oldest is to be preferred but then they prefer the Codex Vaticanis and Sinaticus while ignoring for the most part Alexandrinus because Wescott had a bias against Byzantine texts even though it is just as old. They also do not consider the quality of the text. Sinaticus and Vaticanus have been described as being copied by a very poor scribe with sloppy writing and many misspellings. Further Origin predates these texts and complained about how the scribes in Alexandria were slopy and often paraphrased or added or took away from the texts. Which leads into the next rule that shorter is preferred over longer. As soon as I read that rule I was increduled, there is nothing to say a text was arbitary lengthened or shortened. This is an assumption that to haramonize scriptures of expansions of piety they added to the text most of the time but Origin said they also shortened to simplify the text at times. So you cannot count on this rule. The other reason they didn't give much weight to the Byzantine text is that having more recent manuscripts meant that errors would have propogated and componded over time but this assumes the scribs just chose whichever manuscript to copy and didn't evaluate the manuscripts as to which were of higher quality. So all in all I believe the critical text and the shorter readings is somewhat dubious. I would rather see translations use the majority text which takes into account all texts. Also both Origin and Justin Martyer called out the Sanhedrin in Jaminia and Usar for perverting the Hebrew text which is apparent in more than a hundred passages because all our translations used the MT text. For the OT the Septuagint and DSS really need to be consulted and given more weight than the MT.
If Mark 16:9-20 is not part of the original, then someone has to explain how Tatian, Irenaeus, and Hyppolitus quote it before 200AD. In fact, Tatian, who was a student of Justin Martyr quotes the whole thing in 172 AD.
SHORT CONCLUSION Some late manuscripts and versions contain a short conclusion after Mark 16:8, as follows: But all the things that had been commanded they related briefly to those around Peter. Further, after these things, Jesus himself sent out through them from the east to the west the holy and incorruptible proclamation of everlasting salvation. LONG CONCLUSION Certain ancient manuscripts (ACD) and versions (VgSyc,p) add the following long conclusion, but which אBSysArm omit: 9 After he rose early on the first day of the week he appeared first to Mary Magʹda·lene, from whom he had expelled seven demons. 10 She went and reported to those who had been with him, as they were mourning and weeping. 11 But they, when they heard he had come to life and had been viewed by her, did not believe. 12 Moreover, after these things he appeared in another form to two of them walking along, as they were going into the country; 13 and they came back and reported to the rest. Neither did they believe these. 14 But later he appeared to the eleven themselves as they were reclining at the table, and he reproached their lack of faith and hardheartedness, because they did not believe those who had beheld him now raised up from the dead. 15 And he said to them: “Go into all the world and preach the good news to all creation. 16 He that believes and is baptized will be saved, but he that does not believe will be condemned. 17 Furthermore, these signs will accompany those believing: By the use of my name they will expel demons, they will speak with tongues, 18 and with their hands they will pick up serpents, and if they drink anything deadly it will not hurt them at all. They will lay their hands upon sick persons, and these will become well.” 19 So, then, the Lord Jesus, after having spoken to them, was taken up to heaven and sat down at the right hand of God. 20 They, accordingly, went out and preached everywhere, while the Lord worked with them and backed up the message through the accompanying signs.
Thank you for this. I'd rather know the truth than remain ignorant. You didn't shy away from the major issues, and did your research. Only thing I would maybe have elaborated on would be the potential sources of the adulterous woman story came from. Josephus? Philo?
Regarding 52:55 - If only that were true. However, have you really considered the doctrinal tint of the readings in, say, Codex Bobbiensis and the Sinaitic Syriac?
Can you please talk about 1 John 4:2 - "Hereby know ye the Spirit of God: Every spirit that confesseth that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh is of God:” KJV but in others it will switch out the "is" for "has" which give me the question is he still flesh as the bible alludes to in the gospels with the touching of Thomas on the physical body of Christ. Also, some Manuscripts will replace "confess" that Jesus is come in the flesh with "acknowledge" less of a problem but I can see the contention. If you have addressed it then please time stamp it as it is 5am so I really only fast forwarded to the 3-important variations. Thanks brother love you as alway can wait for new content 3 times a week. 🙂🙂🙂🙂
Skeptics, If the Bi le is supposedly changed 2 different countries will not have exact same thing in English and Bulgarian. The Bulgarian Bible Matches the KJV1611! They are both translated by different people different centuries yet they are identical ! Spelling is not a big deal.
Mike, I found your channel a couple of months ago and now I listen daily. I fashion myself a budding apologist and my faith and resolve to defend the Gospel have been bolstered by your ministry. Thank you so much, Brother!
We need you brother, may God give you discernment and wisdom.
I just got to comment again how awesome it is to have a church willing to handle this kind of thing
Jehovahs Witnesses dive into this on their website because people claim their Bible is false. I would say their Bible is the most accurate based on this video and what JW claim.
I just learned about this from a non christian and honestly I was heart broken. Jesus is my everything and the bible is all I have. Honestly this video brings so much context and comfort knowing what these changes are and how God preserved His Word ❤️.... Thank you Jesus 🙏🏾🙏🏾🙏🏾❤️❤️❤️. Im keeping this video in my pocket to help others.
"Jesus is my everything and the bible is all I have" (I think you need a hobby, join a club or something that does useful stuff, get off your lazy arse and do something)
"Once you snake handle, you never go back" -- one of the many reasons I love to listen to your sermons.
Excellent teaching!
I'm thoroughly enjoying this series so far.
Honestly the more I look into these things im amazed at the accuracy of the bible
Amen my brother. At first it affected and hit me very hard. But after having all clarified, my faith became stronger
The Bible only tells stories,accuracy I wouldn’t think so. They are allegories.if you know what that is. You can not prove much that written in the Bible. Too many chances, bad translation, errors. Siniaticus has 27,000
It’s amazing how they have lied to us about it too!
@@BrockJamesStory if you read the Bible enough you will see cracks, it’s only stories which all three religions of Abraham that has con and enslave mankind, too many people think that this is a perfect but it has so many errors. And the Koran is so violent, and how sane is the people that think of a flying horse, a flying chariot, stopping the sun is reality are only think about death with a vision of heaven and paradise. Insane is what this is. And where does accuracy come in? The Bible is a allegory taking names if they ever exist and making a story out them, being more fiction than fact.
@@BrockJamesStory How so?
Thank you so much for posting this video. I grew up KJVO but I've come to the conclusion that if I believe the claims made by KJVO proponents that all other translations are corrupted with ill intent I would have to pridefully disregard people who teach from or accept translations such as NIV. Your video has helped me understand what the differences really are.
KJV is still top 3 English translations for Bro.
It’s certainly the most beautiful English translation but you are absolutely right that we should embrace most (not all!) other versions as we can learn a lot from them
Timotheos Pontius hey bro...you are great. Thx for comments on KJVO debate.
I have question as to why you have ‘experienced based ‘ videos. Lonnie etc. Quizz8ng not complaint...
Personally, I always had a hard time understanding KJV, as it is wrote in old English. I didn't start actually reading the Bible, until I discovered the NIV & ESV versions.
@@Disciple-ofChrist same here, it's not common language and some passages can be nearly indecipherable to me.
Pastor Mike you are the best, my faith has grown stronger in Christ since listening to your chanel, you are a great blessing 🙏
Just wanted to say THANK YOU!
This is something I have had discussions with non believers about and I have severely lacked understanding in this area.
I am so grateful to have this broken down and to help put to rest doubts that i have also had.
God bless you, your family and ministry Mike!
Pastor Winger your channel is exactly the type of thoughtful and honest Bible exploration and explanation I've been seeking for years! Where is your church?
+Vaughn ONeal Hi Vaughn! Our church website is www.hosannachapel.org
I actually teach the youth (jr high and high school) during our normal services and the studies I upload to RUclips are generally from a Sunday evening service (for all ages) at 5pm. If, in God's providence, you happen to be able to attend then please come up and introduce yourself to me. God bless you!
Dan Wallace says that the best earliest Greek manuscripts have the mark of the beast as 616, not 666. So we have the neighbor of the beast, no big deal.
for those disheartened by the probability their favorite verse is a later addition remember this verse wasn't.
John 21:25
Now there are also many other things that Jesus did. Were every one of them to be written, I suppose that the world itself could not contain the books that would be written.
Actually, the 21st chapter of John is considered by many scholars to be a later addition.
@@endofscene Are there any manuscripts that don't include it? Any trusted manuscripts?
@@ethanhocking8229 Thanks for your questions. I'm not a scholar but I don't believe there are any (known) manuscripts of John that don't include chapter 21.
However, manuscripts are only one form of evidence. Don't forget that our oldest manuscripts are dated to the second century. In the case of John that's a single credit-card sized fragment called P52 (which I believe includes a section of the story of the woman caught in adultery -- which we know is a later insertion). Our oldest complete manuscripts are dated to the third or even the fourth centuries.
In the decades and centuries that passed between the gospels and epistles being written and the earliest copies we have of them, they could have been changed many times. I believe they were. Scholars use various forms of textual criticism to consider such potential changes.
I am personally convinced that John 21 is a later addition and am happy to share some of the arguments with you if you like. I also believe that John 15-17 is an insertion.
@@ethanhocking8229 I just heard from Dr Robert M Price that there is one manuscript of John that doesn't include chapter 21. He says that was the clincher for him in determining that the final chapter is a later addition (of a gospel that is already a mishmash of material).
@Martin ramsbottom And what is in non-canonical gospels doesn't mean Jesus didn't say or do those things. And what is in canonical gospels (earlier or later additions) doesn't mean Jesus did say or do those things. We don't know what Jesus said and did because we weren't there.
Your love for people amazes me pastor Mike, thank you for taking time to do a research and bring up this great information out🙏
Pastor Winger, I am so grateful for you sharing your WEALTH of knowledge! It has helped me recently with determining 'the right' translation (surprise, there is none lol). I follow your channel and learn so much, but it inspires me to dig deeper into the scripture as well! Thank you for your hard work and study. It has been an interesting study for me learning the history of the Textus Receptus and the New Greek Testament (Novus Testament Greace), as well as the differences and basis for them.
I was lost for 30 years. Wasn’t raised in the church. Just lost and following my heart. My heart lead me to the ugly destruction of my own life and the lives of others. I’m so grateful that The Lord saved me, even after so long. I’m thankful He gave me His Word, and I’m thankful He gave me brothers and sisters and pastors like Mike who helped me to understand things I struggled with. Thank you for what you submit to The Lord doing through you, Brother. He gets the glory. You have my thanks.
Superb. Thank you for explaining these details! I appreciate your sharp thinking and also care for believers
Every Christian needs this talk. Thank you.
Thank you, Mike! I appreciate you taking the time to create and share this series!!
"You have to wait for your heart, to catch up with your head"
I have absolutely found that to be true.
These days, I have to keep my head from despising the added text!
(Calm thyself, beating heart.)
EXCELLENT SERIES !!
Nice "parable" with the 1000 Truck Tires
~
(My condolences to the Snake Handlers here in Texas)
Excellent presentation! I pray and hope for this truth may make impact on younger generation who are being brainwashed by sceptics so that they may see the truth you knew and explained exceptionally well. May God redeem our time and the generation, may His kingdom come. God bless you brother. You have nicely defended the truth and protected the believers from being sidetracked or being caught by surprise.
I love that, i was learning so much, but laughing as well!😂😂esp the Snake handling and great commission part🤣🤣I thoroughly enjoyed this.
It’s beautiful to see how God preserved His Word while using men to write it.
Beautiful!
Amen!
Remember that god always resiles inside men
@Creeping Death lm sorry bro, I didn't mean to be so harsh. The bible was written for the wrong reasons, the whole religion was infiltrated all to corrupt the real Holy Scriptures and fool people. People need to wake up in a hurry
Amazing series. A blessing to me… thank you!
This is an excellent condensed teaching. Thank you
Thank you sooo much!!!!! You really are helping us see and remember his promise that the WORD HAS NOT AND WILL NEVER BE LOST!!!🙏💛
Yes Mr Winger, I totally agree with you that we Christians ought to know more than what is in the Bible - its history, its source, the innumerable manuscripts to substantiate etc. Thank you so much for making the effort to enlighten us Christians. May God bless you richly in your service for Him.
This preacher seems quite solid to me. I hope he stays the course.
He lost!
What do you mean he lost?
@@hudsontd7778 I'm gonna need you to elaborate on this...
The first problem I have is the effeminate nature of how mike winger conducts himself, this alone is disturbing.
Mike talks about the originals, I like for him to show WHERE are these originals?
Is he talking about the codex Sanaticus and Vaticanus being older? Who told him this and why would he believe them?
Mike is not specific at all, just a broad brush preaching that he learned from joel osteen.
Appealing to falible men like James White and Dan Wallice as authority to tell us that the bible is NOT absolutely true but that we can be 95% confident in reading as many bibles as we want because they dont teach false doctrine? Right mike, is this what you want us to believe?
So the reason for hundreds of DIFFERENT so called christian denominations is because of interpretation? Has it ever come to mind that maybe the reason people believe in false doctrine is because they are reading false bibles?
James White book KJOC???
What has anybody learn from reading this mike?
@@hudsontd7778 oh ok, you're trolling. Gotcha.
Thanks pastor Mike you addressing important issues and you are right we need to hear it first from honest people who care about us like you, its enlightning and enchoring my faith in God more . Im looking forward to the different translations discussion, interesting. Thank you keep the great work up my pastor
This video was fantastic Mike and this topic is so important for believers and skeptics to understand. Thank you for doing all of the research and studying, your effort and passion is much appreciated!!!
Mike does good work here. Not that he needs my approval, but this is something to be recommended .
This has been such a blessing!!!!!
Thank you for explaining this in simple terms. Have a nice day.
Great video as usual, Mike :) I'd like to add the interpolation of the angels stirring the water was after an original verse which says the waters stirred or moved. So it's likely a tradition that began and was carried on to explain why the waters moved seemingly in a supernatural way.
I’m a huge Bible translation nerd and I loved this video! Thank you!
I just want to say thank you so very much for this information. I wrote EVERYTHING down. You have helped me so much with this information. I greatly appreciate all your hard work. May the Lord continue to bless you and your family.
This has changed my life! Thank you ❤️
Oh man! That last part when he says "actually mom did you know..." I've done that several times thanks to you! And thanks to God who gave you the knowledge!
I absolutely love your teaching. Thank you for this lesson. Very well done.
I'm glad I found this video. It enlightens my understanding concerning my views of versions. However, I will continue to use my KJV. I just like the way it reads.
Thank you for the hard work you're doing to make every of your videos.
My family and I live in Ukraine. When the argument with an unbeliever (who doesnt speak or understand English ) starts there is no source in russian/ukrainian books/channels i can find to refer to.
I wish there was a chance for russian speaking side of the planet to think biblically with your help, Mike. Thank you again for your time and loyalty. God bless you!
Mike, the three tires aren't even flat, they are just leaking air and can be replaced by the spare tires you ALREADY own! ❤ I wish my church would teach on these things, every time I attempt to bring apologetic content to my church I get the stink eye, it makes me wonder if I shouldn't move to a different church because I feel like apologetics is my gift and my gift is not benefiting the congregation I'm a part of because they don't seem open to utilizing it, which makes me sad. If you have any words of wisdom for me I'm all ears! Peace and love in Christ brother!
I have 4 different versions so I can cross reference just because of this. Old English still throws me off sometimes so it makes sense.
Great job Mike. I watched this with my teenage son who thoroughly enjoyed your research and well organized presentation. I have looked into this issue years ago myself and remembered a piece of very significant evidence in support of both the Mark and John sections being inspired scripture. It is the work of Ivan Panin the Mathematician. He was an agnostic with no time for "the word of God". However, one day he looked at it with his Mathematical brain and was stunned to discover number patterns that were in the underlying Greek and Hebrew Canon (both Greek and Hebrew letters can be read as numbers as well). He found that scripture had the Seal of God on it, the number 7. He spent 50 years of his life after giving his Life to Christ examining this pattern in scripture and finding it everywhere. I highly recommend you google his name and look at his books. I think his evidence would have been a perfect addition to your series here. Without leaving you in suspense he found that both those sections of scripture (Mark and John) had the pattern of the surrounding chapters and had many features that were all divisible by 7. Anyone who has never heard of this should go look it up, you will be amazed. It makes sense that the Holy Spirit would leave an irrefutable mark on His work. (Chuck Missler had a few presentations that are still on RUclips talking about the work of Panin).
Great to hear a factual account against those that say there i a half a million variances. Thank you
Superb Presentation of the reality of the Holy Bible, the Inspired Word of God. Thank you in Jesus' Name. Amen.
it kills me that people scoff and ridicule the bible knowing it has so many copies and very few differences. yet some of the most cherished secular writings from the ancient past have some hardly at 50 copies, and people treat them as 100 percent genuine.
It’s because it’s dealing with God. It holds so much more weight then a human in antiquity.
Pastor Mike... I LOVE your channel and your deep dives. I'm going to watch every video! However, I think you may have gotten the history of the Pericope Adulterae wrong. You said it's not mentioned until the 10th century and doesn't show up in the Bible until the 14th. The sources I'm seeing say it's MUCH earlier. Vaticanus doesn't have it but the Latin Vulgate produced by Jerome (300s) does. It's mentioned by Didymus in the 300s, and Eusebius (300s) says that Papias (110 AD) mentioned it. Was that a mistake to say it arrived after the 10th century? This would lend much more credence to your (and Metzger's) assertion that it is historical and is an oral tradition that survived and was added to John. Thanks for all you do!
I think Mike may have made a mistake here and confused it with 1 John 5:7, as it does sound more in-line with the history of the Comma Johanneum (or 1 John 5:7 in the KJV, NKJV, MEV). But yeah, you're right in that church fathers in the 300s did discuss it, including St Augustine.
Thank you brother. I know as an unbeliever I quoted some of this stuff, corruption of text etc
After meeting our Saviour and reading His precious word I was blown away by the truth and Jesus is truth and He set me free.
Of course after awhile I fell for the council of Nicea rubbish that's getting around and a dear friend has too, still is unfortunately.
But after studying scripture and seeking God in prayer, (for once I knew the truth I didn't want to be deceived), for me it simply came down to faith in God. That His timeless Sovereignty and His power would never allow His scriptures or His beloved Sons name to ever be corrupted, it was easy to accept. I love learning more and more about Him and just how everything in the Bible, in history, everything is in His Wonderful hands. So exciting. For me to say "Well I just believe" is good enough for me but doesn't help me defend the faith adequately. So thank you very much for your time and research it has blessed me 😁🌈🙌❤️
Thank you for the video series. As you said, Some manuscripts do not include 7:53-8:11; you eluded to but for those taking notes here is a little more specifics, others add the passage here or after 7:36 or after 21:25 or after Luke 21:38, with variations in the text
Absolutely, Mike...we as Christians, especially as Christians, never need to fear the truth!
"I wish skeptics would be more skeptical of their skepticism"
As to the variation at I John 5:7, there is very early evidence of its existence in the original Greek text given its apparent quotation by Cyprian in the early 200's A.D., where he writes, ""Again, it is written of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit, 'And these three are one.'" (BTW, Excellent lecture!)
According to Metzger, he used the Old Latin text which doesn’t show any evidence of this text. It is thought he read it into the text because of heresies he was fighting at that time. Bible(.)org has an article on this written by Dan Wallace
@@krakoosh1 that's exactly right.
I think it is important to consider that there was an Arian controversy for a century or more and it may have found its way of support among those in the Greek speaking world. Is it not possible that could have factored in why the CJ was not included ? I am just asking.
Also, what do we make of all the quotes of the CJ by early church fathers ?
It seems to me that it flows naturally, grammatically and especially spiritually.
I would say if it is not included in any Greek manuscript before the 10th century than fine, do not include it.
However if there is a question concerning wether that verse was quoted in writing as early as the second century and there is no definitive way of knowing for sure, than it isnt necessary to be so dogmatic either way.
@@jbjoeychic There is grounds for dogmatism. The Comma is of great doctrinal significance, as it appears to communicate the model of redemption, appears to correspond with parables/allusions in the Gospel, and has parallel in the type presented in 7 feast days described in the Torah.
RE: Mark 9:44, 46, 48. There is a school of thought that says Jesus did say it 3 times, and there was a reason for it, because of John 21:16-17, when Jesus asked Peter 3 times "Lovest thou me?"
One of the ways extra words and phrases were added was due to the scribes adding side notes in the margins of the manuscripts for clarity's sake. Then, later on, newer scribes thought they were actually part of the text and added them in.
That seems out of context with the procedural rules of the scribes back then until today. Would appreciate sources to verify. Thanks! Don't want either of us subscribing to a false report.
This was very helpful thank you! There is a lot of urban myth style stuff that floats around on this kind of stuff without any dissertation as it were.
Mike, will you be looking at the NAB translation also next week? I was reading the NAB while watching this video and the notes in the margin were saying the same things you were saying about the big three variations.
I'm pretty sure I will include it. There are far too many translations to include them all but I will do at least one of the Catholic translations (New Jerusalem Bible or the New American Bible) and I may include both. Though how much time I will have for each translation I cover is still something I haven't figured out. I pray I will have wisdom from the Lord in preparation.
Hi, Mike I recently found your channel. And must that your teaching is great. Love the in-depth way you tackle scripture. One question though on the Alexandrian text. (The earlier text) I have heard the argument that the text was greated by the Gnostics who did not believe in the Deity of Christ. Hence the difference with the received text (KJV) Also the new NKJV is taken from the earlier text. Can you please provide your thoughts? Yours in Christ.
He also failed to mention why Erasimus refused to use the Codecs Vaticanus. And failed to mention the strong evidence that the Codecs Siniaticus is a forgery.
(Both deemed by Mike as 'older' manuscripts, and both used in most every translation of the 20th century)
God chose to preserve his Word
Thank you thank you thank you.i just want to add..as a born again believer we have supernatural help..the holy spirit..we can also search multiple translations in seconds with are phone..any problems in our carnal mind ..I believe it we seek..we are required to seek..sad that we have more access to his word than ever but we read it less..what good is the best bible if we only pick it up on Sunday morning..thanks again...please come up with a short video. .to help us share it in Sunday school..preach bro you are doing great
Thanks again for a thorough presentation.
The one I have been concerned about is the one about the lion and lamb changed to lion and wolf. The whole verse is different. That’s the one that got me down the rabbit hole.
John 7:53-8:11 is also the passage often used by self-justifying people to prevent Christians from accusing them of sinning. They say, "well, Jesus said 'I don't condemn you...' " without finishing the sentence "...go and sin no more." So they can't have it both ways.
Thankyou Mike for all your work in the Lord. Im trying to find any video you have on differences between the Septuagint and the Masoretic text.
Hey mike! What are your thoughts on the book of Enoch. Do you have a video on it? I know it didn’t make canon but I’ve heard some buzz about it!
The doctrine of the trinity was an add on itself. The original apostles never taught it and it wasn’t even accepted until 325 AD at the council of Nicaea
Do you still have a job bro? Awesome im so glad there is a church willing to handle these issue! I know you are (or at least think i know) you are continuist of charismatic. It seems that Mark 16:17 is the clearest passage to provethe gifts should have continued. My opinion is that if the longer ending of Mark was added later it actually proves even more th e gifts should have continued.
Regarding 55:05 -- Well, let's consider the position that Mark 16:9-20 is not part of the original text. Mark 16:9-20 is supported by over 99.5% of the extant Greek manuscripts of Mark; of all undamaged continuous-text Greek manuscripts of Mark 16, the text stops at the end of verse 8 in exactly two of them. That's it. So if one contends that 2 manuscripts out of 1,640 are right, and 1,638 are wrong, is it really that different to say that 1,640 out of 1,640 are wrong? Fee taught that I Cor. 14:34-35 is not original. NA28 teaches that no extant Greek reading in Second Peter 3:10 is original. They seem to be granting the skeptic's argument, at least in part.
Based on what we have I would offer this opinion. Most of the early copies were written on Codex (book form) and it is highly probable that if a part of the book were to be lost it would be the last page. You could even say the same thing with a scroll to be honest. I think it is very likely that very early in the manuscript tradition the long ending of Mark was lost completely. And the long ending we have now was most likely an attempt to replace what was lost. This mystery may never be solved but if we ever found a super early manuscript of Mark we might just find a longer ending no one has ever seen before. I think it is highly probable the original longer ending was lost. But I agree I don't think Mark ended where the earliest manuscripts indicate it ended.
Re: Kermit the Frog being elected president:
With the choices of real people available, it is theoretically possible there could be a mass of people so fed up that they'd run a campaign for a write-in vote for Kermie.
Wow...between your series on supposed Bible contradictions and "the Bothers Karamazov" by Fyodor Dostoyevsky audiobook my RUclips hours are probably through the roof.
@Mike Winger can you please explain how we have all of these differences in manuscripts, “the big 3”, number discrepancies, and letter differences in the scripture but we also believe that the Bible is inerrant? How would we defend inerrancy when someone brings up any of these points?
The original bible (or the original autographs to be specific) are inerrant, anything other than those is technically not inerrant because the copyists are not under inspiration when they copy like the writers were when they first wrote. But still we have incredibly accurate bibles these days practically aside from nkjv and kjv
Noooo I love the go and sin no more passage!
One of my favorites.
This definitely hurt my feels
Romans 8:1 doesn’t give me the hope that it gives others. I can’t get past the 2nd part of verse one about those who don’t walk according to the flesh but the spirit.
My Christian walk is so hard. I may not lust after women/look at things I aught not/but I have anger in me. I’ve been praying about it for a while. Yesterday was really bad. I’m just gonna get up, dust myself off and go and follow Christ again.
@@braybilly yes cutting out the news is extremely helpful. I appreciate the words of encouragement brother. God bless you 🙏
I was thinking ah dang I love the passage with the adulterous woman.. then when you said it was probably still historical I was so happy 😅💕 not to hold on to something that probably doesn’t belong in scripture but I am glad it probably happened! ❤️
I believe if it didn't actually happen God wouldn't have let it become part of His holy Scriptures. So yes, enjoy the passage ♥
Little is written about Jesus and his life. Every part of his ministry can't be recorded so I like to think Jesus saved many from stoning to death. After all he did save us all from an eternal death!
The passage in John was a heart blow to me. It has ministered to me. But I only want the truth. Thank God for Mike's work!
@@motherelephant5537 Within the past 2 months I came across a teaching from Messianic rabbi Zev Porat who spoke about the passage in John. It actually convinced me that the account of the adulterous woman didn't end up by accident or chance in that specific location (John 8:1-11) but that God had planned it like this all along. Why? Because the context aligns perfectly with a statement from the Old Testament:
In John 7:37 Jesus declares that he is the *spring of living water:* _"Let anyone who is thirsty come to me and drink. Whoever believes in me, as Scripture has said, rivers of living water will flow from within them."_
The _very next day_ (John 8:1-2) the pharisees test Jesus with the adulterous woman because they don't believe him nor his words. And what does Jesus do? He bends down and *writes on the ground.* Have you ever wondered, what Jesus wrote there into the dust?
Jeremiah 17:13 reveals it:
_"Lord, you are the hope of Israel; all who forsake you will be put to shame. Those who turn away from you will be _*_written in the dust_*_ because they have forsaken the Lord, _*_the spring of living water."_*
I really came to love the nasb
Re: 50:45 -- No other important variants other than the ones you covered here?! That is not the case. Luke 22:43-44. The Alexandrian reading in Matthew 27:49. John 9:38-39. Jude verse 5. And more.
So happy you're here
This man is an absolute messenger of God. I don't want to praise the man, but the message is PHENOMENAL. Thank you SO MUCH for taking the stand & creating the ministry you're doing Mike. I can't begin to explain the to you how much your ministry has completely changed my life. I had SO many questions, but the first time I watched this series (currently watching the 4th time through) along with the "Jesus in the Old Testament" series it was like reaching the end of the movie Sixth Sense - EVERYTHING started connecting like fireworks, like lightning, like power lines that get a little too close in the storm...
I've read the Bible all my life, but EVERYTHING I previously questioned or doubted has connected and it's just BOOM!! *MIC DROP*
THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR YOUR MINISTRY!!!
Someone asked me the other day, "If we don't trust the Catholic Church at all, how can we trust the New Testament which was compiled and approved by a bureaucratic, post-Constantine Catholic Church." I gave them the information I know about how the counsels didn't choose the books but merely affirmed the letters that were already being widely circulated and removed those that were unauthenticated. What more would you say?
I would tell him to stop watching RUclips and look at primary sources.
I'd also be asking them what was in the 50 Bibles Emperor Constantine commissioned in 331 and how did the people doing the copying know what to include?
Great series of talks but here you're not arguing about how God preserved His Word but about the v ltd & poor manuscript basis for the KJV. We now have a v clear understanding of what the autographs said and the modern translations reflect this.
It is a sign of God's grace and supernatural provision that everything needful for salvation was preserved, even in such a poorly translated version as the KJV.
Nice review; however there are a few places I do wish you had addressed.
- Titus 3:10,11 NKJV says a divisive man is a sinner, but yet we know Jesus caused division.
- Many modern version leave off the "how" He died at 1 Cor 15:3. Isn't the fact that Christ bleed to death important?
- Again the modern versions are confusing at Heb 3:16. Did all reject or only some?
- At Gal 2:16 are we justified by our own personal faith in Christ which can ebb and flow or are we justified by the Faith of Christ? This is a most important doctrine dealing with salvation.
If one is justified by one's personal faith, does one loose salvation if one's faith fails?
As for Titus 3:10, the Greek word is hairetikon, like a heretic, not divise in the way you are thinking. Plus, division is ok, but for the truth and that is what Jesus did, dividing right and wrong. As for 1 Corinthians, the word for died is apethanen. It doesn’t say anything about bleeding to death but we can assume that is how he died with how excruciating it was on that cross. As for Hebrews 3:16, the Greek says ou pantes, meaning not all. If not all we have to assume some at least did not reject. And for Galatians 2:16, the word in Greek is pisteOs. It means to have faith in or upon or to believe. We have faith in Christ and that is what saves us. It is not a boastful thing or a merited thing but the grace through our faith that saves not the works of the law. About losing salvation, i wouldn’t say the faith fails per se but you could fall back to your old life anytime so a maintenance of faith is definitely taught in the Bible, but not for earning salvation everyday but because you have salvation, Glory to God. God will not force us to have faith but the faith of a mustard seed (Matthew 17:20) is all it takes to really start this wonderful born again experience and sanctification process and journey in Christ. I pray this helped. God bless. Repent and trust in Jesus
I believe that God allows for what's in the Bible to keep being promulgated through time, and what He wants to be removed to fall away and be forgot.
Am I crazy to think that it's more likely people would skip words when copying a manuscript rather than add words?
1 John 5:7,8 has to be the biggest issue for KJV readers and for the sake of textual integrity. But, IHMO, the bigger issue is that the KJV translators didn't even provide a marginal note pointing out the questionable text; i.e., the Comma Johanneum. Erasmus commented about the Comma in his 3rd Greek edition's annotations, Stephanus commented about the Comma's lack of Greek witness in three of Greek mss he collated; Tyndale, Coverdale, Matthews, and the Great Bible marked v7 in parentheses. The KJV translators had access to all the aforementioned sources yet didn't leave any marginal comment like they did in Luke 17:36; i.e., "this verse is wanting in most of the Greek copies"
well Mike , i am following your speeches a long time now: could you point at any text in the New World Translation of Jehovah's witnesses , where they have corrupted the text of the bible ; and i dont mean just a different rendering but : have they left out or added texts?
In Colossians 1:16-17 the word "other" is added 4 times to twist the Bible into teaching that Jesus is a created being. This can be seen clearly in the Watchtower's own interlinear Bible (which I have a copy of). I intend to make a video about it in a month or so. Here is a plain example of addition to the text which can not be said to be caused by rendering. There is no word in the Greek which they are rendering "other", nor is there any implication in the Greek that "other" is somehow meant or assumed. The simplest explanation is that the men who made the NWT didn't want to allow Colossians to say what it said. They simply didn't like what the Bible taught about Jesus so they added the word "other" to change it.
As all other scriptures show that Jesus was the son of God and not God himself we have to distinguish in texts so that no confusion is there:
Look! Also, there was a voice+ from the heavens that said: “This is my Son,+ the beloved,+ whom I have approved.”+
matthew 3
13 Now when he had come into the parts of Caes·a·reʹa Phi·lipʹpi, Jesus went asking his disciples: “Who are men saying the Son of man is?”+ 14 They said: “Some say John the Baptist,+ others E·liʹjah,+ still others Jeremiah or one of the prophets.” 15 He said to them: “YOU, though, who do YOU say I am?”+ 16 In answer Simon Peter said: “You are the Christ,+ the Son of the living God.”+ 17 In response Jesus said to him: “Happy you are, Simon son of Joʹnah,* because flesh and blood did not reveal [it] to you, but my Father who is in the heavens did.
matthew 16
.+ 5 For even though there are those who are called “gods,”+ whether in heaven+ or on earth,+ just as there are many “gods” and many “lords,”+ 6 there is actually to us one God*+ the Father,+ out of whom all things are, and we for him;+ and there is one Lord,+ Jesus Christ,+ through whom all things are,+ and we through him.
1 cor 8
so if you would agree with the father than you would agree that Jesus is not almighty God himself ; that justifies the rendering of John 1 saying that Jesus was A GOD.
Now what you dont see in collosians 1: is this :He is the image+ of the invisible+ God, the firstborn+ of all creation;
WHY DOES IT SAY THAT CHRIST IS THE IMAGE OF GOD AND NOT GOD HIMSELF?
Colossians underlines that Jesus was Gods son (the kingdom+ of the Son of his love, verse 13)
so as Jesus is not God himself and he did not create nor himself nor God , he created all OTHER things.!!
Other is used to make things clear and that is not without a reason:
Nevertheless, give as gifts of mercy+ the things that are inside, and, look! all [other] things are clean about YOU.* 42 But woe to YOU Pharisees, because YOU give the tenth+ of the mint and the rue and of every [other] vegetable, but YOU pass by the justice* and the love of God! These things YOU were under obligation to do, but those other things not to omit.
lets see what darby says:
But woe unto you, Pharisees, for ye pay tithes of mint and rue and every herb, and pass by the judgment and the love of God: these ye ought to have done, and not have left those aside.
you see what you get when you dont use OTHER ?
IT should have said : these ye ought to have done, and not have left those [others] aside.
afterraincomessun Isaiah 9:6
afterraincomessun their perversion of John I.
Such a great teaching
God bless. You should wear clothes with modesty and lack of showing.
This really helps. Thanks
The most important thing is what do we lose doctrinally if the questioned passages, specifically the big 3, are not included? If nothing, then fine.
Liked this video
There is a varient that is almost entirely different to any bible (mainly because it was completely written by man and it shouldn't be considered a bible) its called the queer bible. Pretty sure i can stop explaining there.
Great study!!
Thanks for all the soft soaping.
Mike, my question is when a manuscript had a mistake the scribes considered the word of God so holy they didn’t destroy the copies that had the mistakes. So how do we know that some of these “differences“ that we find are not in fact scrolls that were discarded due to their mistakes?
The scribes typically corrected any mistakes they were aware of. Many of our manuscripts contain such corrections, whether by the original scribe or a later one.
Thanks you so much 😇😇
Regarding 1 John 5:7
I remember hearing in a RUclips video that the very first time those additional phrases are seen are in a Latin translation in the fourth century. And it was in a sidebar comment, not in the text itself. Then at some point in time it got mixed into the text. Then it became accepted. I think the video was a Dan Wallace video but could be wrong.
I'm only 13 minutes in and if everything that Mike Winger is saying is true, well then, it's absolutely mind blowing that the bible was preserved this well.
I honestly don't care so much how well the old testament was reserved sense everything I need to know as a Christian is in the New Testament. But I'd still like to see what changes occurred in the OT.
You should care much more about the old testament. If it weren't for the old testament, there'd be a lot less reason to believe all the things about Christ. He fulfilled over 300 messianic prophecies. Mathematician Peter Stoner calculated the probability of one man fulfilling just a small number, just 48 of them, to be 1 in 10 followed by 157 zeros. This is an astronomically unachievable task for any normal human being, and Christ didn't fulfill just 48. The law and prophets were speaking of Christ, so we should care about the old testament. The fact he fulfilled so many of the old testament prophecies shows he was from God and was a fulfillment of all the previous revelations from Him. It's important. That's why the new testament constantly quotes the old testament.
With the 5k+ manuscripts there are some 300k+ variants. The issue I have with Nesstle-Aland and Westcott-Hort is I do not necessarily agree with their premise. The first premise is that oldest is to be preferred but then they prefer the Codex Vaticanis and Sinaticus while ignoring for the most part Alexandrinus because Wescott had a bias against Byzantine texts even though it is just as old. They also do not consider the quality of the text. Sinaticus and Vaticanus have been described as being copied by a very poor scribe with sloppy writing and many misspellings. Further Origin predates these texts and complained about how the scribes in Alexandria were slopy and often paraphrased or added or took away from the texts. Which leads into the next rule that shorter is preferred over longer. As soon as I read that rule I was increduled, there is nothing to say a text was arbitary lengthened or shortened. This is an assumption that to haramonize scriptures of expansions of piety they added to the text most of the time but Origin said they also shortened to simplify the text at times. So you cannot count on this rule. The other reason they didn't give much weight to the Byzantine text is that having more recent manuscripts meant that errors would have propogated and componded over time but this assumes the scribs just chose whichever manuscript to copy and didn't evaluate the manuscripts as to which were of higher quality. So all in all I believe the critical text and the shorter readings is somewhat dubious. I would rather see translations use the majority text which takes into account all texts. Also both Origin and Justin Martyer called out the Sanhedrin in Jaminia and Usar for perverting the Hebrew text which is apparent in more than a hundred passages because all our translations used the MT text. For the OT the Septuagint and DSS really need to be consulted and given more weight than the MT.
I find it amusing that the John passage is probably what most non-Christians will quote when accusing Christians of being too judgemental.
If Mark 16:9-20 is not part of the original, then someone has to explain how Tatian, Irenaeus, and Hyppolitus quote it before 200AD. In fact, Tatian, who was a student of Justin Martyr quotes the whole thing in 172 AD.
SHORT CONCLUSION
Some late manuscripts and versions contain a short conclusion after Mark 16:8, as follows:
But all the things that had been commanded they related briefly to those around Peter. Further, after these things, Jesus himself sent out through them from the east to the west the holy and incorruptible proclamation of everlasting salvation.
LONG CONCLUSION
Certain ancient manuscripts (ACD) and versions (VgSyc,p) add the following long conclusion, but which אBSysArm omit: 9 After he rose early on the first day of the week he appeared first to Mary Magʹda·lene, from whom he had expelled seven demons. 10 She went and reported to those who had been with him, as they were mourning and weeping. 11 But they, when they heard he had come to life and had been viewed by her, did not believe. 12 Moreover, after these things he appeared in another form to two of them walking along, as they were going into the country; 13 and they came back and reported to the rest. Neither did they believe these. 14 But later he appeared to the eleven themselves as they were reclining at the table, and he reproached their lack of faith and hardheartedness, because they did not believe those who had beheld him now raised up from the dead. 15 And he said to them: “Go into all the world and preach the good news to all creation. 16 He that believes and is baptized will be saved, but he that does not believe will be condemned. 17 Furthermore, these signs will accompany those believing: By the use of my name they will expel demons, they will speak with tongues, 18 and with their hands they will pick up serpents, and if they drink anything deadly it will not hurt them at all. They will lay their hands upon sick persons, and these will become well.”
19 So, then, the Lord Jesus, after having spoken to them, was taken up to heaven and sat down at the right hand of God. 20 They, accordingly, went out and preached everywhere, while the Lord worked with them and backed up the message through the accompanying signs.
Can you cite the source? I would like to investigate.
The word you are looking for is duplicate.
God wouldn’t make any mistakes. No spelling mistake, no grammatical error and no need to remove any verses from his book...
Thank you for this. I'd rather know the truth than remain ignorant. You didn't shy away from the major issues, and did your research. Only thing I would maybe have elaborated on would be the potential sources of the adulterous woman story came from. Josephus? Philo?
Regarding 52:55 - If only that were true. However, have you really considered the doctrinal tint of the readings in, say, Codex Bobbiensis and the Sinaitic Syriac?
So happy you're here
Can you please talk about 1 John 4:2 - "Hereby know ye the Spirit of God: Every spirit that confesseth that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh is of God:” KJV but in others it will switch out the "is" for "has" which give me the question is he still flesh as the bible alludes to in the gospels with the touching of Thomas on the physical body of Christ. Also, some Manuscripts will replace "confess" that Jesus is come in the flesh with "acknowledge" less of a problem but I can see the contention. If you have addressed it then please time stamp it as it is 5am so I really only fast forwarded to the 3-important variations. Thanks brother love you as alway can wait for new content 3 times a week. 🙂🙂🙂🙂
Skeptics, If the Bi le is supposedly changed 2 different countries will not have exact same thing in English and Bulgarian. The Bulgarian Bible Matches the KJV1611! They are both translated by different people different centuries yet they are identical !
Spelling is not a big deal.