What the ESV Generation Will Lose - Dr. Dan Haifley
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 8 сен 2024
- In this session Dr. Dan Haifley examines what important aspects of God’s Word are left behind in the translation of the ESV
Subscribe for more videos
Follow us on Facebook
Visit kjbrc.org for more information
#kjv
The problem that I see with King James Only people is, they think that they are right all of the time concerning the particular wording of scripture. When in reality they don't know Greek!
@11:50 You cannot pray to Jesus? *He said do not pray to me after I am gone?* Chapter and verse please.
You have some strange doctrine? Sounds almost heretical to me.
ACTS 7:58-60
And cast him out of the city, and stoned him: and the witnesses laid down their clothes at a young man's feet, whose name was Saul.
59And they stoned Stephen, *calling upon God, and saying, Lord Jesus, receive my spirit.*
60And he kneeled down, and cried with a loud voice, *Lord, lay not this sin to their charge.* And when he had said this, he fell asleep.
JOHN 14:10-14
Believest thou not that I am in the Father, and the Father in me? the words that I speak unto you I speak not of myself: but the Father that dwelleth in me, he doeth the works.
11Believe me that I am in the Father, and the Father in me: or else believe me for the very works' sake.
12Verily, verily, I say unto you, He that believeth on me, the works that I do shall he do also; and greater works than these shall he do; because I go unto my Father.
13And *whatsoever ye shall ask in my name, that will I do,* that the Father may be glorified in the Son.
*14If ye shall ask any thing in my name, I will do it.*
Jesus instructed the Jew to pray to the Father, and that the Father was greater than Himself.
Jesus had not yet been crucified, rose from the dead, or ascended to the Father for a glorified body.
The scripture also stated that he learned obedience, even though he was sinless.
HOW do you explain Acts 7:59 where Stephen is DYING and calling out to God?
He says Lord Jesus, receive my spirit!
Clearly Jesus had ALREADY ASCENDED BEFORE THIS.
Thank you!
That struck me hard, what he said. I have never heard anyone teach such a thing. Seems blasphemous.
I did just look it up on the web, and came across the passages you gave, and more.
"In my name" just means according to his will. Many get caught up on ending every prayer with "In Jesus' name" as if that makes all the words prior somehow justified, even if the prayer was self-serving, etc..
Good question.
That's what happens when you believe in the Trinity
@@ohgin12345You mean the Godhead as the scripture says. Trinity is not found in Scripture
@@johnmarston8868 I was implying that the Trinity confuses ppl including that guy
Greetings dearly beloved from pastor Peter Wiebe Wall, Alberta Canada 🇨🇦.
I can't read well, but I'm telling you through the Holy Spirit I can read an understand the KJV Bible. In 1 Corinthians 2:14 it says) But the natural man receiveth not the things of the Spirit of God: for they are foolishness unto him: neither can he know them, because they are spiritually discerned.
So there are many who read without spiritual understanding; basically help from the Holy Spirit.
They are foolishness to them, I've tried telling my family and showing them, they won't listen and told me I'm in a cult.
But Jesus Christ told the Holy Spirit to show me Matthew 13:57 Luke 4:24 it profits you nothing in your home or town where you are known.
But when I show a unsaved and now born again brother or sister this truth that all the other versions are perverted. They listen and believe, and own KJV Bible's now.
So this is the living Word of GOD JESUS CHRIST for He is the word made flesh. Its not about its easier to read, its about having the whole words of Jesus Christ. And not having someone cut an rip piece out of Him to make money.
Its as if they are there as Jesus Christ walks by carrying the cross and they rip piece of His hair of to sell it.
Its that messed up that it's ok to those reading from them an not caring enough to see this truth.
You said what I said. It's a spiritual issue, not a readability issue.
God can use the per-versions, just as He uses fallible men, but the KJV Is the Bible, with the Words unfallible, as God preserved them.
Evil always has attempted to undermine God's word.
Hold fast till He comes.
@@jancollard7169just curious. Then why would Satan create those perversions then
@@jancollard7169 My family can only read and speak Spanish. Is there a KJV in Spanish?
Dear @Forgivenofsins
What does Paul mean in 2 Corinthians 11:6 ?
"But though I be rude in speech, yet not in knowledge; ...... "
Is it ok for our speech to be rude or is Paul sinning ? DZ
Around 37 minute mark you said God created Jesus. Jesus always existed, He was not created.
John 1:1
1 In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.
Jesus IS The Word.
Please show verses where you believe Jesus was created.
Dr. Haifley misspoke at that point. He was explaining how Jesus was in the form of God and also how He is the begotten Son and not merely “a” son of God. Unfortunately as he was explaining the topic briefly, he said what you referenced unintentionally. We of course affirm that Jesus is not created but exists eternally with the Father before time began.
@@kjbrc
Also may want to correct him where he says "we are not to pray to Jesus." There are several instances where people prayed to Jesus...once he was ascended.
@@kjbrc Just before Christmas our church hung up a huge banner saying "Jesus only son" instead of "only begotten son" for linage. It woke me up to start researching manuscripts! I have watched every kjbrc video three or more times!!!!!!!!!
@@kjbrcThat's the problem when you believe in the Trinity.
You see, if you really believe that Jesus and the Father is one. There is not going to be this confusion
@@ohgin12345exactly. "Trinity" is nowhere in scripture. It's in the roman catholic catechism though...(article 234; 253).
I love the KJBRC but definitely some strange doctrine in this talk. I realize that "Jesus was created/made" could have been simply a verbal mistake (speaking in front of people is always hard and makes people nervous, I get it) but he also said "Jesus and God are the same," which again could be a mistake but sounds really weird, and then he said you shouldn't pray to Jesus, which I've heard before but never so emphatically. I understand where people get that doctrine from but I think it's bad doctrine anyway. The Bible does not teach some explicit ban on praying to Jesus. Praying means to ask and therefore the very last verse of the Bible is a prayer to Jesus, "Come, Lord Jesus." Meaning we're asking Jesus to return soon. I'm not trying to speak badly about Dr. Haifley as I've never heard him speak before, but it seems like he said an alarming amount of odd things, even if you give him grace for perhaps misspeaking once or twice.
Exactly. Arianism. Diminishing the deity of Jesus Christ, the Son of God is Very God. Not a good look for this organization or conference.
To be clear, I use around 15 translations including the KJV. Now, that's fare.
God has promised us that He will preserve His Word forever!!
How? Care to answer that question? Certainly can't possibly be in an 16th century language of men. (English). English hasn't existed for the vast majority of human existence. What about all those generations of mankind that never had the King James Version?
KJV is readable..
Dear @kathleenking47
It is readable to many people who are acquainted with reading Early Modern English (EME - Elizabethan English), but there are many people today that have difficulty in reading EME. That is up to the skills of the reader. But if it is a heart desire to reach people who don't have those skills or find it uncomfortable to read EME, then it is desirable to have an English translation of God's Word to help other understand the Scriptures better. The Gospel is not always about us, but we should consider taking the Gospel to others.
Remember, one to the stated goals of the KJV back in 1611 was to make an English translation of God's Word that is in the language of the common people. Not the language of the elite educated people.
This was true of the New Testament Scriptures in Greek. much of the NT was written in Koine Greek, the common Greek that the average common people used, not the Classical Greek that the highly educated people used. The Translators of the KJV were extremely well educated in Classical Greek, but had problems translating sections of the NT that had a lot of Koine Greek. This problem likely accounts fro some of the translation errors in the KJV.
There is another issue. Being able to read EME does not mean that you understand what it means. The big problem is the obsolete words that have changed meaning over time. Even the greatest reader of EME may read the text very well but may nor be aware that a word has changed meaning sine 1611 when that English word was used to translate the text. Unless you are essentially a EME scholar extremely well verse in the vocabulary of 1611, one would probably need to have a EME dictionary from 1611 to check and see if various words have changed meanings or not.
I had one very clear experience with this problem when one gentleman was unaware that a particular word had changed meaning since 1611 and meant something completely different than what it meant back in 1611. He was living his life by the contemporary meaning of the word unaware that it meant something very different back when the KJV was translated. This misunderstanding of what the Scripture were actually saying led him to conduct his behavior in a sinful way.
ALL translations of God's Word, whether in English, German, French, Spanish etc. Lose accuracy and trustworthiness over time (unless it is regularly updated and revised). The older the translation is, the more susceptible it is to the deterioration of its accuracy and trustworthiness. it is befuddling how many KJV Only Supporters cannot grasp and comprehend this very important obvious point. Be Well, DZ
@@Silverheart1956 It's readable to anybody with reading skills. If you can't read the KJV you have poor reading skills. That's the problem.
Dear @@ZacharyStevens1833, Hello !
I some what agree with you but there are distinctions that must be made.
1. Being able to read is a task of understanding the sounds each letter and syllable represents and being able to reproduce that sound, That is reading.
This point is just undeniable.
2. Being able to read something (sounding it out phonetically) does NOT necessarily mean one understands what one is reading.
I used to be very proficient in reading Greek, but I did not have a good understanding of the vocabulary, and nor was I able to understand the nuances of the Greek grammar (I had difficulty in determining if it was present tense or aorist tense, etc. or what person the verb was in)
3. Even if one can read Early Modern English (EME) very well, and knows the current meaning of the words they read, that does not mean that is what the words meant back in 1611, when the KJV was first published. Words change meaning over time. When English words change meaning the translation loses accuracy, and when it loses accuracy it loses trustworthiness.
Easy example everyone that is a little older grasps: James 2:3a in the KJV says:
"And ye have respect to him that weareth the gay clothing,"
When I say the word "gay" today, the first understanding of that word (particularly with young people) is homosexual. IS the KJV talking about how Elton John dresses - in gay clothing ? I am old enough to remember when that word first meant something different (can't; believe I am admitting my antiquity).
A better word in contemporary English to translate the Greek word "λαμπρὰν", that James actually wrote in the actual Word of God would be "fine" clothing, or "bright" clothing. Using the word "Gay" as a translation fro the Greek word "λαμπρὰν" today misleads people from the actual meaning that God's Word is communicating.
If you were a pastor explaining this to your congregation, you would explain that God's Word is not promoting one to dress like a homosexual.You would have to explain what the word meant back in 1611.
Homosexuals use this verse claiming that the KJV says it's ok to dress alike homosexual and extend that understanding to imply the KJV is wishy washy about homosexuality. Many homosexuals prefer to quote from the KJV (Yes I understand the reasons for that quite well)
Note the NKJV appropriately updates this word to "fine", thus preserving the original meaning of the Word of God so that people who understand contemporary English will not be confused
Summary
So in summary, I AGREE with you that people can learn to read EME, Particularly if they are well trained in phonics.
The big problem is NOT reading, (You are mostly correct ! ), but instead comprehension and accurate understanding !
Just curious ! What do these verses mean ? They are easy to read ! BUT ...
Do not cheat by using any aids, just the English text of the KJV
1. "The LORD will smite thee with the botch of Egypt, and with the
emerods, and with the scab, and with the itch, whereof thou canst
not be healed." (Deu. 28:27)
2. "And thou shalt eat it as barley cakes, and thou shalt bake it with
dung that cometh out of man, in their sight. (Ezek. 4:12)
3. "But though I be rude in speech, yet not in knowledge" (2 Cor. 11:6a&b)
This is interesting,
Wessex Gospels 1000 AD
“God lufede middan-eard swa þæt he sealde hys akennedan sune
þæt nan ne for-wurðe þe on hine ge-lefð. Ac habbe þt eche lyf.”
Wycliffe Bible 1385 AD
"For God louede so the world, that he yaf his `oon bigetun sone, that
ech man that bileueth in him perische not, but haue euerlastynge lijf. "
Tyndale Bible 1526 AD
"For God so loveth the worlde yt he hath geven his only sonne that none
that beleve in him shuld perisshe: but shuld have everlastinge lyfe."
King James Bible 1611 AD
"For God so loued ye world, that he gaue his only begotten Sonne: that
whosoeuer beleeueth in him, should not perish, but haue euerlasting life.
King James Bible 1769 AD
"For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life."
New King James Bible 1982 AD
"For God so loved the world that He gave His only begotten Son, that
whoever believes in Him should not perish but have everlasting life."
King James Bible. 2016 AD
"Because God loved the world so much He gave His only begotten Son,
that whoever believes in Him would not perish but have everlasting life."
Be Well, And fix you eye on Him, DZ
@@ZacharyStevens1833 The main problem is understanding it. The AV is a spiritual book. The Words are God Breathed.
2Ti 3:16 All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness:
God Breathed into Adam and he became a living soul. Good breathed into the dry bones and they became alive. The Words of God are alive.
It is a spiritual book, and it takes the Holy Spirit to understand it.
@@ZacharyStevens1833
You are too quick to make such an assertion.
One important point to consider is that anyone with phonics training can read the KJV, but they many know know what some of the words they are reading actually mean. Yes of course on can read without understanding what they read.
The KJV is in Early Modern English which is different from contemporary English. Yes a good portion is readable by most people if they take their time reading it.
However, there are words in it that we do not use today (dead words) and most people have difficulty understanding what they mean unless they have developed some familiarity with the vocabulary of Early Modern English.
There are also obsolete words in it that do not mean the same think today that they meant back in 1611, when the KJV was published. One of the big problems these present is that the reader may think the word means what it means in today's modern English without any awareness that it means something different.
I have seem first hand examples of this in talking with KJV Only Supporters.
DZ
Question I haven't been able to get an answer to from KJV Onlys. If KVJ is the only perfect preserved word of God, not through re-inspiration, why did the translators chose words alternately from the Masoretic Text, the Vulgate, and the Septuagint? It would seem if any one of them were perfect, then the translators would have only selected from that one. If someone has an answer, I'd love to hear it. Not looking for a fight, we are brothers/sisters in Christ but I would appreciate an answer that makes sense.
I've learned so much from Robert Breaker and Mike Hoggard on the KJV.
I will never read another version ever again.
@@PkCrochet Are you aware of them having an answer about my question?
You don’t believe God preserved his words, you are your own authority
I know a channel on RUclips that gives an answer to this kind of questions. It’s “ New Life Of Albany Ga “ The name of the pastor is Steve Waldron.
I dun think that anyone would say it's a fundamental
Very interesting part on Copyright in depth! Thank you.
Ever read Matthew 5:22 in the "KJB" calling people fools and dumb@$$. You are right, i would walk out too. Christ was not created. So condescending. I dont see a humble man of Christ. Mark Ward is at least humble...
37:33 He states God created the Son. Did he mean to say that? That is classical Arianism and a dangerous heresy. While I agree with most things said of the KJV. I use it myself. But what is he saying about the Son, our Christ Jesus? And earlier he said "you know you're not supposed to pray to Jesus" 11:57. I believe he's referring to John 16 ver. 23 But that is a clear refinement of what Jesus meant as Stephen's prayer as he was being stoned was to Jesus Acts 7 ver. 59 "And they stoned Stephen, calling upon God, and saying, Lord Jesus, receive my spirit" Calling upon God is the same as you can plainly see in the verse. And as Calvin stated in his commentary concerning this "Therefore, casting off all care of the body, he is content to commit his soul into the hands of Christ. For he could not pray thus from his heart, unless, having forgotten this life, he had cast off all care of the same.". Brothers, if I am wrong in any of these, please show me. Perhaps he confused the statement or I misunderstood his meaning. We are to call upon the Father in Christ name. But there is nothing wrong with calling upon Jesus as he is Very God. I like this organization and have Dr. Sorenson's book "Neither Oldest or Best". But we have to keep not just the text intact but the fundamental doctrines of our faith pure. Jesus is the Eternal God as well as the Father and the Sprit.
KJVRC worships the Father, Son, and Holy Bible.
I don't think the KJV was ever updated in its words. Spelling? Yes. But I do not know of one word which was modernized from 1611 to today. In fact in some places it was made more archaic with the Ye being applied more consistently. Cambridge scholar David Norton said, "Fundamentally it comes to this: the language of the KJB, as embodied in the spelling, can be modernised, but it cannot be translated. If 'thou shalt not kill' can be changed to 'you shall not kill' because it is an archaic form, then archaic words can be given modern substitutes, and a new translation emerges."
I heard that someone was recently trying to protest in England and remove the copyright because the crown never paid for the translation work to be done and therefore the copyright should not be upheld.
Mark Ward is wrong about Commnedeth, he is wrong about Miserable and many other words. He doesn't want to recognize archaic words in the NKJV or difficult words in the ESV. He presents only one side of the story and it is a twisted side at that.
Wrong
Words where changed in Ruth 3:15 and in other places
No im not talking about a Mandela effect
@@Mr-pn2eh Possibly I wasn't clear enough. My intention was that I do not know of a word which was updated in the sense of modernized. Do you know of a word in the KJV which was modernized since 1611? I know that some words were changed, but I don't know of one which was modernized.
My 1611 Nelson print has differences. Some may be printers errors and can be tossed out. But there are a few that are significant.
@@jerem0621 Again, I'm not sure that I'm being clear enough. It is not that there are not differences. It is that the differences are not attempts to modernize, except when we talk about orthography.
@@christopheryetzer oh yea, I agree with you there. The differences are very minor (when taking standardized spelling into account) and it is nothing like many modern translation "revisions" where there are a significant number of changes.
19:00 Excellent point! What people don’t realize is that the modern Bibles cannot support pure and complete Christian doctrine. The pastors who change from the KJV to a modern version often still know right or mostly right Bible doctrine. But they’ve stepped away from the Bible that supports that right doctrine. And when the next generation comes up, as Dr. Haifley said, they will have neither correct doctrine nor the Bible to tell them completely correct doctrine. Look at even the word “Calvary” that is often used by Christians. “Calvary” is only mentioned once in the entire Bible (Luke 23:33). It’s only in the KJV. Therefore, people who use the word “Calvary” cannot even support the usage of that word if they are using a modern Bible.
The notes in NET version of NT explain how the words for “place of the skull” appear in the ancient languages. To quote: “The place that is called ‘The Skull’ (known as Golgotha in Aramaic, cf. Jn 19:17) is north and just outside of Jerusalem. The hill on which it is located protruded much like a skull, giving the place its name. The Latin word for Greek κρανίον (kranion) is calvaria, from which the English word “Calvary” derives (cf. Lk 23:33 in the KJV).”
@@bradleybunk6463 “Calvary” was just one simple example of how the modern Bibles can’t support some Christian words or doctrines. There are actual doctrines affected in modern Bibles like the blood atonement and the Trinity. But even so, the NET Bible has “Calvary” in the footnotes and not in the text itself. Therefore, the actual NET text of scripture cannot support “Calvary” without a supplemental footnote. That doesn’t count.
No doctrine is changed in the modern translations. Another lie from the KJV only cult.
Dear @@SB-zl7mm Hello !
What The Scriptures Actually Say
Actually the Scriptures do not use the word "Calvary" (in Luke 23:33, or elsewhere).
God's Word actually says "the place called "Κρανίον" (Kranion, Strong's # - 2898). The actual, literal meaning is, "skull".
You may recognize the Greek word "Kranion" as the root word for our English word , "cranium", our medical word for "the part of the skull that encloses the brain"
Bible translations that translate God's Word literally will say "the place is called the Skull" (Luke 23:33).
Other wise, if Luke 23:33 says "skull", then it is an accurate translation of God's Word.
Where Did They Get The Word "Calvary" ??
So if the word "Calvery" is not used in God's Word in Luke 23:33, then where did the translators of the KJV get the word "Calvary" ?? Good Question !
Well, they got it from the Latin Vulgate of the Roman Catholic Church.
In the Latin Vulgate, Luke 23:33 says:
"et postquam venerunt in locum qui vocatur Calvariae ibi crucifixerunt
eum et latrones unum a dextris et alterum a sinistris"
Now, one does not have to know Latin to be able to identify a Latin word in this verse that appear to be similar to the word we know as "Calvary".
Can you find it ? Yes, "Calvariae" "Clavariae" means skull in Latin.
The KJV translators didn't go to the Greek manuscripts of text that Luke was originally written in, they just copied the Latin word "Calvariae" from the Latin Vulgate of the Roman Catholic Church, into the KJV as a transliteration of the Latin.
There is more ! The Greek word "Κρανίον" (Kranion, Strong's # - 2898), is actually used 4 times in the New Testament, in Matthew 27:33, Mark 15:22, Luke 23:33, and John 19:17. It is only in Luke 23:33 that the KJV Translators use the Latin derived word "Calvary". The other 3 references properly translate "Κρανίον" (Kranion), with the English word, "Skull".
Matthew 27:33, "to say, a place of a skull,"
Mark 15:22, "The place of a skull."
Luke 23:33, "is called Calvary, there"
John 19:17, "called [the place] of a skull, which"
Bottom Line:
If the Bible translation you use says "skull" in Luke 23:33, then you are using a translation that goes directly to the Greek, just as Luke wrote it and give you a literal, word for word translation of God's Word.
However, if If the Bible translation you use says "Calvary" in Luke 23:33, then you are using a translation that did not go directly to the Greek, as Luke wrote it, but instead you are using a translation that copied from the Latin Vulgate of the Roman Catholic Church using a Latin word that is not in God's Word.
Yeah, I suppose this fact will certainly rattle the cages of many KJV Only Supporters that don't study the Scriptures for themselves, but instead listen to what the KJV Only priests tell them what to believe. Many will probably go into denial and ignore what God's Word actually says, hoping what they heard will just disappear. Many will try their hardest to forget these facts and NEVER EVER, "test all things" to know God's Truth. That is because like the Pharisees, holding on to the their traditions of men (and the translations of Men) is a more important object of their faith than Trusting God's Word. Very sad, but true !!!
Be Well, DZ
Dear @SB-zl7mm
I do hope you can study the Word of God at a deep enough level to see that God's Word never mentions the Word "Calvary". Nope ! Its not in Luke 23:33 !!!
The Word "Calvary" is mentioned once in the KJV, BUT it is never mentioned in God's Word of the New Testament (or OT).
In actuality, Calvary Chapel cannot support the name of their church with the Bible, because the word "Calvary" is not in God's Word at all !
The Word "Calvary"
Min. 24:23 Dr. Haifley remarks that those who use the ESV don't know who Lucifer is. What a silly remark ?
To prove him definitively wrong, .... I use the ESV and I know who "Lucifer" is thought to be. There Dr. Haifley has been prove wrong.
Actually the name/word "Lucifer" is NOT mentioned in the Scriptures.
He says he knows how the word came then he mentions it came through the Septuagint. Emphatically NO !!! It did NOT come through the Septuagint !!!
It has NOTHING to do with the Septuagint !!! Why did he say that ?????
Di he assume only KJV Only Supporters would be listening and knew they would never catch that error ?
Though the Word "Lucifer" is never mentioned in the Hebrew OT (No not even in Isa. 14:12), did come from the Latin Vulgate of the Roman Catholic Church. The KJV just copied and transliterated the Latin word into the text of the KJV, without ever going and literally translating the actual Hebrew of God's Word. That is why the KJV uses the Latin word "Lucifer" in it's Text, but many of the newer translations went back to the original source and directly translated it literally from God's Word in Hebrew, providing us with a literal, word for word, accurate translation of God's actual word, without any influence from the Roman Catholic Church.
For Me, I want God's Word, not Roman Catholic theology in Isa. 14:12., So I will use the more reliable translations of God's Word for Isa. 14:12, not the KJV.
Who gave this guy a doctorate degree ? From where ?
How can he possibly have a doctorate degree in theology and be so confused about such simple matters of Bibliology ??? I guess there are degree mills that have low accreditation.
The Truth is really tough against the KJV Only traditions of men.
Be Well, and search for God's Truth, DZ
God has showed me that too. ( Partly) All of the people.. most of the older people that have switched grew up on a King James Bible. It's awesome to have the scripture to go with it. Thank you brother
The speaker was definitely ill-prepared. He made a lot of mistakes in his lecture. Plus, he can't stand still. He makes the KJBSC look novice. Sorry, just trying to help.
Why does he have to stand in place...
@@katiedelgadillo6973 He doesn't. Great exercise.
He clowned around too much like an entertainer.
@@skipmars7979 I agree.
have you ever seen a preacher stand in one spot?
Acts 4:5-12 (KJB)
5 ¶ And it came to pass on the morrow, that their rulers, and elders, and scribes,
6 And Annas the high priest, and Caiaphas, and John, and Alexander, and as many as were of the kindred of the high priest, were gathered together at Jerusalem.
7 And when they had set them in the midst, they asked, By what power, or by what name, have ye done this?
8 Then Peter, filled with the Holy Ghost, said unto them, Ye rulers of the people, and elders of Israel,
9 If we this day be examined of the good deed done to the impotent man, by what means he is made whole;
10 Be it known unto you all, and to all the people of Israel, that by the name of Jesus Christ of Nazareth, whom ye crucified, whom God raised from the dead, even by him doth this man stand here before you whole.
11 This is the stone which was set at nought of you builders, which is become the head of the corner.
12 Neither is there salvation in any other: for there is °°none° °other°° °°name°° °under heaven° °given among men°, °whereby we° °must be saved°.
Proverbs 30:4 (KJB)
4 Who hath ascended up into heaven, or descended? who hath gathered the wind in his fists? who hath bound the waters in a garment? who hath established all the ends of the earth? what is his name, and what is his °°son’s name°°, if thou canst tell?
-
Psalm 110:1 (KJB)
1 The LORD said unto my LORD, Sit thou at my right hand, until I make thine enemies thy footstool.
Matthew 22:
41 ¶While the Pharisees were gathered together, Jesus asked them,
42 Saying, What think ye of Christ? whose son is he? They say unto him, The Son of David.
43 He saith unto them, How then doth David °°in spirit°° °call him° °Lord°, saying,
44 The Lord said unto my Lord, Sit thou on my right hand, till I make thine enemies thy footstool?
45 If David then call him Lord, how is he °his° °°son°°?
46 And no man was able to answer him a word, neither durst any man from that day forth ask him any more questions.
-
Zechariah 14:9 (KJB)
9 And the LORD shall be king over all the earth: in that day shall there be °one LORD°, and his °°name°° °one°.
1 Corinthians 8:6 (KJB)
6 But to us there is but one God, the Father, of whom are all things, and we in him; and °one Lord° °°Jesus Christ°°, by whom are all things, and we by him.
The Godhead Doctrine (°not° trinity):
John 8:19-24 (KJB)
19 Then said they unto him, Where is thy Father? Jesus answered, Ye neither know me, nor my Father: if ye had known me, ye should have known my Father also.
20 These words spake Jesus in the treasury, as he taught in the temple: and no man laid hands on him; for his hour was not yet come.
21 Then said Jesus again unto them, I go my way, and ye shall seek me, and shall die in your sins: whither I go, ye cannot come.
22 Then said the Jews, Will he kill himself? because he saith, Whither I go, ye cannot come.
23 And he said unto them, Ye are from beneath; I am from above: ye are of this world; I am not of this world.
24 I said therefore unto you, that ye shall die in your sins: for °if° °ye believe not° °that° °I am° °he°, °ye shall° °die in your sins°.
2 John 1:7-11 (KJB)
7 For many deceivers are entered into the world, who °confess not° °that° °Jesus Christ° °is° °come° °in the flesh°. This is a deceiver and an antichrist.
8 Look to yourselves, that we lose not those things which we have wrought, but that we receive a full reward.
9 Whosoever transgresseth, and abideth not °in the° °doctrine of Christ°, hath not God. He that abideth °in the° °doctrine of Christ°, he hath °both° °the Father and the Son°.
10 If there come any unto you, and °bring not° °this doctrine°, receive him not into your house, neither bid him God speed:
11 For he that biddeth him God speed is partaker of his evil deeds.
Acts 17:24-29 (KJB)
24 God that made the world and all things therein, seeing that he is Lord of heaven and earth, °dwelleth not° °in temples° °made with hands°;
25 Neither is worshipped with men’s hands, as though he needed any thing, seeing he giveth to all life, and breath, and all things;
26 And hath made of one blood all nations of men for to dwell on all the face of the earth, and hath determined the times before appointed, °and° °the° °bounds of their habitation°;
27 That they should seek the Lord, if haply they might feel after him, and find him, though he be not far from every one of us:
28 For in him we live, and move, and have our being; as certain also of your own poets have said, For we are also his offspring.
29 Forasmuch then as we are the offspring of God, °we° °ought not° °to think° °that° °°the Godhead°° °is like unto° °gold, or silver, or stone°, °graven by art° °and° °man’s device°.
Colossians 2:4-9 (KJB)
4 And this I say, lest any man should beguile you with enticing words.
5 For though I be absent in the flesh, yet am I °with you° °in the spirit°, joying and beholding your order, and the stedfastness of your faith in Christ.
6 As ye have therefore received Christ Jesus the Lord, so walk ye in him:
7 Rooted and built up in him, and stablished in the faith, °as ye° °have been taught°, abounding therein with thanksgiving.
8 °Beware° °lest any man spoil you° °through° °philosophy and vain deceit°, °after° °the tradition of men°, °after° °the rudiments of the world°, °and not° °after° °Christ°.
9 °For° °in° °him° °dwelleth° °°all°° °the fulness of° °°the Godhead°° °°°bodily°°°.
--
1 Corinthians 8:5-6 (KJB)
5 For though there be that are called gods, whether in heaven or in earth, (as there be gods many, and lords many,)
6 But °to us° there is but °°one God°, °the Father°°, of whom are all things, and we in him; and °°one Lord° °Jesus Christ°°, by whom are all things, and we by him.
1 John 5:7-9 (KJB)
7 For there are three that bear record in heaven, the Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost: and these three °°are°° °one°.
8 And there are three that bear witness in earth, the spirit, and the water, and the blood: and these three agree in one.
9 If we receive the witness of men, °the witness of God° °is greater°: for this is the witness of God which he hath testified of his Son.
-
Genesis 5:1-2 (KJB)
1 This is the book of the generations of Adam. In the day that God created man, in °°the° °likeness°° °of God° made he him;
2 Male and female created he them; and blessed them, and called their name Adam, in the day when they were created.
Genesis 2:7 (KJB)
7 And the LORD God formed man of the °dust of the ground°{body}, and breathed into his nostrils the °breath of life°{spirit}; and man became a °living soul°{soul}.
1 Thessalonians 5:23-24 (KJB)
23 And the very God of peace sanctify you wholly; and I pray God your °whole° °°spirit°° and °°soul°° and °°body°° be preserved blameless unto the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ.
24 Faithful is he that calleth you, who also will do it.
--
Romans 1:16-23 (KJB)
16 For I am °not ashamed° °of° °the gospel of Christ°: °for it is° °the power of God° °unto salvation° to every one that believeth; to the Jew °first°, and also to the Greek.
17 °For° °therein is° °the righteousness of God° °revealed from faith to faith°: °as it is° °written°, °The just° °shall live by faith°.
18 For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men, who hold the truth in unrighteousness;
19 Because that which may be known of God is manifest in them; for God hath shewed it unto them.
20 For °the° °invisible things° of him from the °creation of the world° °are° °clearly seen°, being °understood by° °the things° °that are made°, even his °eternal power° and °°Godhead°°; so that °they° °are° °without excuse°:
21 Because that, when they knew God, they glorified him not as God, neither were thankful; but became vain in their imaginations, and their foolish heart was darkened.
22 Professing themselves to be wise, they became fools,
23 And °changed° °the glory of° °the uncorruptible God° °into° °an image° °made like to° °°corruptible man°°, and to °°birds°°, and fourfooted beasts, and creeping things.
Romans 2:15-16 (KJB)
15 Which shew the work of the law written in their hearts, °their° °conscience° °also° °bearing witness°, and their thoughts the mean while accusing or else excusing one another;)
16 In the day when God shall judge the secrets of men by Jesus Christ according to my gospel.
Romans 1:24-25 (KJB)
24 Wherefore God also gave them up to uncleanness through the lusts of their own hearts, to dishonour their own bodies between themselves:
25 °Who° °changed° °the truth of God° °into a lie°, °and° °worshipped and served° °the creature° °more than° °the Creator°, °who is blessed for ever°. °Amen°.
{ Prov 15:28,2 Tim 2:15,Isa 28:10,Isa 34:16,Jn 5:39,Luk 24:7,Acts 17:10-11,1 Thess 4:11-12,2 Tim 3:14-17,Rom 15:4,1 Cor 2:13,1 Jn 5:10-11 (KJB) }
the °Son° °°of°°, God the Father;
the °Spirit° °°of°°, God the Father;
the °Son and Spirit° °°of°°, God the Father;
the Son, Jesus Christ the Lord, the person and image of, the Godhead:
John 10:36-38 (KJB)
36 Say ye of him, whom °the Father° hath sanctified, and sent into the world, Thou blasphemest; because I said, °I am° °the° °Son °of° God°?
37 If I do not the works of my Father, believe me not.
38 But if I do, though ye believe not me, believe the works: that ye may know, and believe, that the Father is in me, and I in him.
John 10:30 (KJB)
30 °I and my Father° °°are°° °one°.
1 Corinthians 8:6 (KJB)
6 But to us there is but °one° °God, the Father°, of whom are all things, and we in him; and °one° °Lord° °Jesus Christ°, by whom are all things, and we by him.
Hebrews 1:3 (KJB)
3 Who being the brightness of his glory, and °the° °express image° °of° °his° °person°, and upholding all things by the word of his power, when he had by himself purged our sins, sat down on the right hand of the Majesty on high;
Colossians 1:12-19 (KJB)
12 Giving thanks unto °the Father°, which hath made us meet to be partakers of the inheritance of the saints in light:
13 Who hath delivered us from the power of darkness, and hath translated us into the kingdom of his dear Son:
14 In whom we have redemption through his blood, even the forgiveness of sins:
15 Who is °the image° °of° °the° °°invisible° °God°°, the firstborn of every creature:
16 For by him were all things created, that are in heaven, and that are in earth, °visible and invisible°, whether they be thrones, or dominions, or principalities, or powers: all things were created by him, and for him:
17 And he is before all things, and by him all things consist.
18 And he is the head of the body, the church: who is the beginning, the firstborn from the dead; that in all things he might have the preeminence.
19 For it pleased °the Father° that °in° him should °all fulness° °dwell°;
Romans 1:20 (KJB)
20 For °the invisible things° of him from the creation of the world are clearly seen, being understood °by° the things that are made, even his eternal power and °Godhead°; so that they are without excuse:
Colossians 2:9 (KJB)
9 For °°in°° him dwelleth °all° °the fulness° °of° °the Godhead° °°bodily°°.
2 John 1:3 (KJB)
3 Grace be with you, mercy, and peace, from °God the Father°, and from °the° °Lord Jesus Christ°, °the° °Son °of° the Father°, in truth and love.
2 Corinthians 13:11-14 (KJB)
11 Finally, °brethren°, farewell. °Be perfect°, °be of° °good comfort°, °be of° °one mind°, °live in peace°; and °the God° °of° °love and peace° °shall be° °with you°.
12 Greet one another with an holy kiss.
13 All the saints salute you.
14 The grace of the Lord Jesus Christ, and the love of God, and the communion of the Holy Ghost, be with you all. Amen.
1 Thessalonians 5:23-24 (KJB)
23 And the very °God of peace° °sanctify° °you° °wholly°; and I pray God your °whole° °°spirit°° and °°soul°° and °body° be preserved blameless °unto the° °coming of our° °Lord Jesus Christ°.
24 Faithful is he that calleth you, who also will do it.
Galatians 6:18 (KJB)
18 °Brethren°, °the grace° °of° °our Lord Jesus Christ° °be with° °your° °spirit°. Amen.
{ Prov 15:28,2 Tim 2:15,Isa 28:10,Isa 34:16,Jn 5:39,Luk 24:7,Acts 17:10-11,1 Thess 4:11-12,2 Tim 3:14-17,Rom 15:4,1 Cor 2:13,1 Jn 5:10-11 (KJB) }
He Is The Door; the Door(Body) to the Father(Soul):
John 1:1,14 (KJB)
1 In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and °the Word° °was° °God°.
…
14 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 1:17 (KJB)
17 For the law was given by Moses, °but° °°grace° °and° °truth°° °came by° °Jesus Christ°.
-
John 14:6 (KJB)
6 Jesus saith unto him, °I°(body) °am° °the way°, °the truth°, °and° °the life°: °no man° °cometh° °unto° °the Father°(soul), °but° °by me°(body).
John 10:1 (KJB)
1 Verily, verily, I say unto you, °He that° °entereth° °not° °by° °°the door°° °into the sheepfold°, °but° °climbeth up° °some° °other° °way°, °the same° °is° °a thief° °and° °a robber°.
John 10:7-9 (KJB)
7 Then °said Jesus° unto them again, Verily, verily, I say unto you, °I am° °the door°(body) °of the sheep°.
8 °All° °that ever° °came° °before me° °are° °thieves and robbers°: °but° °the sheep° °did not hear them°.
9 °I am° °the door°(body): °by me° °if° °any man° °enter in°, °he° °shall be° °saved°, and shall go in and out, and find pasture.
John 10:16 (KJB)
16 And °other sheep° I have, which are not °of this fold°: them also I must bring, and they shall hear my voice; and there °shall be° °one fold°, °and° °one° °shepherd°.
---
2 Timothy 2:19 (KJB)
19 Nevertheless the foundation of God standeth sure, having °this seal°, °The Lord° °knoweth them° °that° °are° °his°. And, °Let every one° °that° °nameth° °the name of Christ° °depart from iniquity°.
1 Timothy 2:5-6 (KJB)
5 °For there° °is° °°one°° °God°, and °°one°° °mediator° °between° °God and men°, °the man° °°Christ Jesus°°;
6 Who gave himself a ransom for all, to be testified in due time.
1 Timothy 3:16 (KJB)
16 And °without controversy° °great° °is° °the mystery° °of° °godliness°: °God° °was° °manifest° °in° °the flesh°, justified in the Spirit, seen of angels, °preached unto° °the Gentiles°, believed on in the world, received up into glory.
Colossians 2:9 (KJB)
9 °For° °°in°° °him° °dwelleth° °°all°° °the° °fulness° °of° °the Godhead° °°bodily°°.
---
John 8:23-27 (KJB)
23 And he said unto them, Ye are from beneath; I am from above: °ye are of° °this° °world°; °I am° °not° °of° °this° °world°.
24 I said therefore unto you, that ye shall die in your sins: for °if° °ye° °believe not° °that° °I am° °he°, ye shall die in your sins.
25 Then said they unto him, Who art thou? And Jesus saith unto them, Even the same that °I said° unto you °from the beginning°.
26 I have many things to say and to judge of you: but he that sent me is true; and I speak to the world those things which I have heard of him.
27 They understood not that °he°(body) °spake° °to them° °of° °the Father°(soul).
-
John 14:8-9 (KJB)
8 Philip saith unto him, Lord, shew us °the Father°, and it sufficeth us.
9 Jesus saith unto him, Have °I° been so long time with you, and °yet° °hast thou not known° °°me°°, Philip? he that hath °seen me° hath °seen the Father°; and how sayest thou then, Shew us the Father?
-
John 1:18 (KJB)
18 °No man° hath °seen° °°God°° at any time; °the° °only begotten° °Son°, which is °in° °the bosom° °of° °the Father°, he hath declared him.
Romans 1:20-21 (KJB)
20 For °the invisible things° of him from °the creation of the world° are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, even his °eternal power° and °°Godhead°°; so that they °are without excuse°:
21 Because that, when they knew God, they glorified him not as God, neither were thankful; but became vain in their imaginations, and their foolish heart was darkened.
-
John 10:27-33 (KJB)
27 My sheep hear my voice, and °I° °know them°, and °they° °follow me°:
28 And I give unto them °eternal life°; and they shall never perish, neither shall °any man° °pluck them° °out of° °my° °hand°.
29 My Father, which gave them me, is greater than all; and °no man° is able to °pluck them° °out of° °my Father's° °hand°.
30 °I°(body) °and° °my Father°(soul) °°are°° °one°.
31 Then the Jews took up stones again to stone him.
32 Jesus answered them, Many good works have I shewed you from °my Father°; for which of those works do ye stone °me°?
33 The Jews answered him, saying, For a good work we stone thee not; but for blasphemy; and because that thou, being a man, °makest thyself° °God°.
{ Prov 15:28,2 Tim 2:15,Isa 28:10,Isa 34:16,Jn 5:39,Luk 24:7,Acts 17:10-11,1 Thess 4:11-12,2 Tim 3:14-17,Rom 15:4,1 Cor 2:13,1 Jn 5:10-11 (KJB) }
The book of Enoch is not Scripture and tells us that, however it points to Christ and just as with the per-versions, God can use it for His glory.
You can also Argue that the satanic bible can lead ppl to Christ as well
@@ohgin12345 that's what the per-versions are. All glory to God.
@@jancollard7169 I dun think you get my point. but it's ok
The "book of Enoch" is fake.
@@wawabbit book 2&3 have been proven to be fake, yes. The DSS have proven book l is not.
What if there are differences between various translations ?
If the text of the ESV is different from the text of the KJV, then it is necessary to go back to the Hebrew and Greek Text of God's Word to see which translation is correct.
The standard by which to assess the veracity and trustworthiness of any English translation of God's Word, is the Word of God in the very language the Spirit of God chose to guide the writers of the Scriptures.
The Hebrew and Greek text of the Scriptures are the standard and authority over all translations of God's Word, whether English, Latin, Spanish, German, etc. That is the unchangeable standard.
There have been times when the KJV does a better job of translating God's Word into English, than the ESV. However, most of the time the ESV does a better job of translating God's Word into English than the KJV.
I have encountered many more translation errors in the KJV, than I have found in the ESV.
These translation errors in the KJV are detected when I have compared the text of the KJV against the Greek text of the Textus Receptus.
I do not consider (or count) the obsolete words in the KJV, as translation errors in the KJV, because at the time of translation (the era of the early 1600s) that word was an accurate translation of the original text into English. So I think the translators of the KJV did their job at the time and that had no idea that the meaning of the word would later change with time.
However, it is necessary to keep older translations up to date by revising the obsolete words to preserve the accuracy of the translation. If you fail to do this then the translation usually becomes less accurate and trustworthy over time. This is one of the problems with the KJV.
I think some of the translation errors in the KJV are a result of the fact that the translators of the KJV did not know the nuances and grammar of Koine Greek very well. They were masters and experts of Classical Greek, but their understanding of Koine Greek (the type of Greek used by the New Testament Writers) was lacking. Christian Biblical Scholars of today have a much better understanding of the nuances of the vocabulary and the grammar of Koine Greek.
However, I think there are other, multiple reasons as to why these translation errors exist. DZ
The translators of the KJV were extremely well versed in several languages. They would talk to each other in Greek. No one alive now has the knowledge those men had. Some of them learned great at 5 and 6. Years of age. Using a Greek dictionary, or having a year or 2 of Greek.
All the "modern bibles" were translated mostly from the Sinaticus, and Vaticanus,
How do you as one human man know which is right or wrong. Are you the FINAL AUTHORITY?
Are you setting yourself up as God?
Dear @@conniefischer3263 , Hello ! Thank you for the response and discussion.
There is some truth to some of what you are saying, but some of what you have said is not quite correct.
Quote # 1.
You said, "The translators of the KJV were extremely well versed in several languages."
This is true. Many of them were well versed in English (of course), Classical Greek, Latin, German, and some in Hebrew and Aramaic. There were others who may have had an understanding of some other near eastern languages.
None of the KJV translators knew some of the ancient languages that are really important to Biblical studies such as: Egyptian Hieroglyphs, Egyptian Demotic and Hieratic, Cuneiform, Akkadian, Hittite, and some other middle eastern Languages that were not as significant to Biblical Studies.
None of the KJV translators had a good understanding of Koine Greek (the Greek most of the NT was written in, sometimes called "Biblical Greek") Some in that day referred to "Biblical Greek" as the "Holy Ghost Greek". It was not until the 1800s when thousands of papyrus documents written in Koine Greek were found and studied, that scholars finally developed a strong understanding of Biblical, Koine Greek.
Today's Biblical scholars are usually scholars of Koine Greek. There were no Koine Greek scholars in the 1600s (NONE !), which means none of the KJV scholars were Koine Greek scholars - experts in the Greek that most of the New Testament was written in.
Quote # 2.
You said "No one alive now has the knowledge those men had."
The KJV translators were brilliant scholars, in their day, but there are scholars today that far exceed the knowledge and understanding of the KJV translators. (REALLY !!)
Your assertion has become a favorite talking point of many KJV Only Supporters but it is completely as false, inflated perception of the skills and abilities the KJV Scholars had.
My Greek Professor, Dr. Willam Larkin (Columbia Graduate School of Bible and Missions [today CIU]. in the 1980s), knew and understood vastly more about Koine Greek (the Greek that most of the New Testament was written in), than all of the KJV scholars put together. that is because none of the KJV translators knew what Koine Greek was, but Dr. Larkin specialized in Koine Greek - He was an expert in Biblical Greek (Koine Greek), but he also was well versed in the other four Classical Greek forms and modern Greek.
The example of a Genius Scholar - Dr. William Albright (1891 - 1971)
The KJV translators could not be compared to people like Dr. William Albright who is considered "one of the twentieth century's most influential American Biblical scholars", and the father of Biblical Archaeology. He was the Professor of Semitic Languages at Johns Hopkins University for nearly 30 yrs. and knew all the languages that all the KJV translators knew, all together, plus many more Biblical important languages that that had not been deciphered in the 1600s. His linguistic skills were nothing less than incredible. When Albright entered college, he already knew English, Spanish, French, German, Classical Greek, Koine Greek, Latin, and a fair knowledge of Hebrew and Assyrian. While in college he became an expert in Akkadian & afterwards learned Arabic and modern Hebrew. Later in life he became and expert in semitic languages (a whole language group), also Ethiopic. By 1926 Albright had mastered more than 26 ancient and modern languages but his love of the southern Levant drew him to focus on those ancient languages that led to formation of Hebrew. Specifically, he concentrated on Proto-Canaanite, the earliest Northwest Semitic alphabetic text and scripts that date before ca. 1400 BCE . Mastering 26 ancient and modern languages is far more than all the KJV translators knew, all together !
The idea that "No one alive now has the knowledge" that the KJV translators had is a purely misinformed statement directly from the rumor mill and have absolutely no true to it. Its very much like saying there is not a medical doctor today that has the medical knowledge that a medical doctor of the 1600s had. Both are very silly statements and any one making such a claim is very misinformed and following very poor sources of information.
Quote # 3.
You said, "Some of them learned great at 5 and 6. Years of age"
I think you may had meant "learned Greek", right ? (no problem, My fingers often don't obey what my mind wants them to type).
I have heard that before, and I suppose it is possible, because some Christians in those days were more serious about Biblical studies and wanted to learn the Original Languages of the Bible so they can study The Scriptures on a deeper level, so they may have been taught that early. (I used to teach my middle school Sunday School Class the Greek alphabet and many Greek words from God's Word.)
Though many had told me this, no one had documented any verifiable evidence to prove this claim. It could be true, but I suspect it is more likely a rumor that many KJV Only Supporters spread. If you can document some references to provide some evidence that supports the claim, I would be very open to the evidence. I am always open to real evidence to support truth (because all truth is God's Truth).
Quote # 4.
You asked, "How do you as one human man know which is right or wrong."
Easy question !! Because I diligently study God's Word and use the reasoning skills God has given me as a Human Being made in the image of God, to search for Truth
I have told people that, Jesus said, "I am the Way, the truth, and the Life, and no one come to the Father by through me."
They ask me, "How do you as one human man know" that is right ?
I tell them, Because God told me that In His Word. I seek Truth.
Dear Connie, Do you know right from wrong ? How ?
If you know right from wrong, does that make you the FINAL AUTHORITY ?
Of course not ! any more than it makes me the "Final Authority"
If you know right from wrong, "are you setting yourself up as God ?"
No ! Of course not
It's easy to apply those accusations towards me, without realizing they can equally represent you !!!!
I and a Christian educator that teaches Christian Biblical Systematic theology and Christian apologetics in my church. I spend a lot of my time in study (to be a good tool fro God to use in helping Christians become more biblically and mindfully mature before God. If something I said does not make sense to you, I am more than willing to answer any questions for you (that is part of the ministry God has given me to serve Him with). Be Well, DZ
No video
Had to shift to full screen and it was restored.
At about 46:46 Mark Ward is a tough one for me. He's one of those people that my Lord Jesus tells me to pray for, but I get incredibly angry at his content. Same goes for James White.
I'm not "KJVonly" btw. My position is quite simple: the King James is The English Bible. It is the Bible for the English speaking world.
I read the KJV (pce + 1611 Oxford), but I'm curious what KJVonlyists think of the Reina Valera 1909 (I also speak Spanish).
I find that Spanish bible to be most excellent. Btw, note: I did not say the 1960 Reina Valera. The RV1909 is amazing tho.
Thoughts?
The KJBRC endorses the Reina Valera Gomez, which was translated from the Received Text.
Reina Valera uses the Textus Receptus as it's NT source text. It will still have some of the weaknesses typical of the Textus Receptus.
Being a Roman Catholic translation, I would suspect it has more Roman Catholic influence than the KJV.
@@Silverheart1956 I wasn't aware that Reina Valera was a Roman Catholic translation. I'm fairly certain it was a translational work carried out by Protestant Lutherans, first in Spain and then the second RV (1602) in Switzerland
Dear @@AnHebrewChild , Hello !
When I read your post I immediately realized I had misspoken !!!
I apologize. it is late here and my mind had already gone to sleep.
I was speaking with someone earlier referencing the Douay-Rheims Bible, which is the Roman Catholic Bible. I had that one on my mind and did not realize what I was saying. How could I have made such a foolish oversite ? I have a copy in my library at home (obviously not a first edition copy, but a much later copy)
The Reina Valera is a Spanish translation of the Bible published before the 1611 KJV was published. It did use the Textus Receptus as it's NT Greek text source, so it is considered to be a "Reformation Bible". I don't know by whom or where is was translated, nor have I used it much (I don't really speak Spanish but have it for reference).
I assume it is similar to other translations using the Textus Receptus for the NT and the Masoretic text for the OT. I have never evaluated it to see how accurately it was translated or if it have the typical Textus Receptus errors in it like many of the Reformation Bibles Typically have.
I do assume it has been in usage by the Spanish speaking people for a very long time, even slightly longer than the KJV has been used by English speaking people.
Sorry, I misinformed you. As a Christian educator I strive to make sure the information I give is very accurate and trustworthy - the teacher's responsibility. I do appreciate you challenging my information and calling me out on it !
I will try to be more mindful of what I am typing ! Thank You !
Be Well, DZ
The Original KJV 1611 had the Apocrypha. King James had the word "tyrant removed." It has been revised many times 1612, 1613, 1616, 1629, 1638, & 1769. Over 5000 words differ from the original Greek and changed over time. Do real research on all translations , When Jerome translated the Greek into the Latin Vulgate, he had access to ancient Greek documents of the Bible that don't exist today. God Bless All.
37:30 the speaker says "God created Jesus. He made him."
Ironically, the speaker says this right after quoting, "neither give heed to Jewish fables..."
what a joke. You can say "he misspoke," but no sorry. This is a damnable error. This video teaches damning heresy and needs to be removed (forthwith).
I will check back in three days to see if my comment is removed or hidden. Hopefully when I check back, the video itself will be removed.
We would ask you to give a little grace to your brother in Christ as he did in fact misspeak.
@@kjbrc right but it's still error and may confuse new believers. Are you not concerned that it may confuse new believers ?
I came on here to comment on the exact same thing. How do you mistakingly say "Jesus was a created being?"
We have provided an explanation in this very comment section already but will do so again. Dr. Haifley was attempting to describe how Jesus was in the form of God, the begotten Son and not simply “a” son. As he moved his message along to refocus on his main topic he used the wrong term and didn’t notice. If he had noticed in the moment he would have clarified, but unfortunately he didn’t. That is why we are clarifying here. But an allegation of heresy and false doctrine is a strong charge. Dr. Dan Haifley is neither a heretic nor a false teacher. He’s a human being who made a mistake in his speech.
@kjbrc first off, I watch a lot of the council videos and love them. I've learned a lot, and thank you for the content. But saying I'm falsely accusing someone is way out of line. He flat out said it. Now you can add context, and I'll make my own decisions, but I am not falsely accusing anything. He said it.
1 Corinthians 14:9 (ESV)
So with yourselves, if with your tongue you utter speech that is not intelligible, how will anyone know what is said? For you will be speaking into the air.
Why do you continuously post a random verse that has nothing to do with the subject? Mark Ward takes this verse out of context and all his fanboys copy him.
@@ZacharyStevens1833
Hi Zachary, "fanboy" is a demeaning word for one Christian to call another. Can I suggest "student", "follower", or "imitator"? I hope I imitate Mark as he learns from Paul as he learned from Christ. (1 Corinthians 10:31-11:1)
Paul's subject in 1 Corinthians 14 is intelligibility in worship. He teaches the principle that we should use words in church that people can understand so that we can build them up.
@@CalebRichardson "Fanboy" "follower" "student" "imitator" OK I will let you pick the one you like. 1 Corinthians is in the context of tongues as you well know.
Please see 1 Kings 6 and tell me the KJV is to be preferred over any of the formal equivalence translations now in use. In fact, they all are problematic in that particular text. Also, if you can read and use the Masoretic Hebrew text and the Greek text of Stephens 1550 with text critical notes if you wish you do not need the KJV or any other translation. Which means you can also read the Septuagint which is used repeatedly in the NT when OT quotations are used. See Luke with respect to the Sudanese eunuch for example. On Isaiah 53. This is just the simple facts of the case. 80% of the KJV NT is essentially Tyndale so what are we really dealing with here. Translations are just that translations and all must be measured against the Originals. Hebrew Aramaic and Greek. How did Paul or any other Christian get along before King James and his merry band of translators came around in the 17th century. If one thinks that the texts behind the KJV are to be preferred rather than what we call the critical text beginning in the 19th century fine. But to place such a high premium on the KJV is a bridge too far and one that will not lead to any significant progress and improvement in theological and Christian truth that saves the soul. The last time I looked many Pentecostals rely on and favor the KJV only. What more needs to be said. The grave errors of dispensationalism and secret raptures were derived using the KJV. So much for a single revered translation. I use and love the KJV, but I made it my aim in life never to be left or dependent upon any one translation however good it is. The KJV is a good translation and worthy of being regarded as the word of the living God sufficient for faith and practice. God has blessed and will always bless His truth. To the degree any translation is faithful and accurate to that degree we will be sound in the faith. To the degree any translation fails or is faulty to that degree our theology and faith will be faulty. See Mark 4:21-25. The light is the truth of God and to the measure we hear and receive the truth to that extent we will live out the truth in our lives. To the extent we do not hear the truth to that extent it will be measured against us. The conveyance of the truth is indispensable which is why a translation must be true to the originals. I believe that the KJV men did their absolute best to do this as do all good translators who are genuine believers. The anti KJV camp is just as wrongheaded as the KJV only or KJV supreme camp in my study and estimation.
The infallible King James Bible preserves the Holy Scriptures in the lingua franca of the world today.
KJV PCE All the Way..
1611 from Hendrickson or Oxford university press (not the 1769) all the way
@@Mr-pn2eh ?
@@DrGero15 I'm guessing he is opposed to the changes in the 1769 Blayney revision (the current generally considered "standard" bible that will show up if you order a "KJV" without specifying which revision you want) I personally like the earlier 1762 Paris edition because (as ive read) it maintained the inclusion of the apocrypha, preface from the translators, and the margin notes with alternate word translations as the translators intended.
1611 is great, PCE is better and the Concord edition is best. Make no mistake, the 1769 standard is the Word of God.
@@jeremywolffbrandt7488 The Apocrypha can be found in pretty much all KJV Bibles up until about 1850. My desktop Bible is a 1769 and it has everything you described.
What is there to object to in the 1769 over the 1611? Spelling corrections?