I read and studied from modern translations for decades after God saved me out of the Jehova's witness cult. I didn't really give much thought to this Bible version question at all for many years. All I knew is I had to stay away from the perverted NWT that is printed by the Jehovah witnesses. I have to say that from personal experience, once I gave the Authorized version (KJV), the word of God took on a different kind of power in my life. I read it more. I meditate on it more. The weight of the words is heavier in my heart. It just changed my whole attitude toward the Bible. No matter how I tried with my NASB, it always felt more like an academic pursuit, rather than communing with God and hearing his words. A recent encounter with several charts doing side by side, verse by verse comparisons between the Authorized version and NIV, NASB, NKJV, ESV and several others was just really shocking to me. It completely solidified my resolve to avoid the constantly changing modern versions. This modern trend of updating Bible translations every few years to fit modern feministic, homosexual and gender neutral ideology would completely lose its grip on the Church if we all switched back to the KJV. Just the 2 cents from someone who has been greatly blesses by switching to the Bible translation that the post-reformers and later on the great puritan preachers and writers used, continuing on to be the lamp to the feet of believers all the way through the end of the 1980s and '90s. What has been done to english Bible translation in the last 30 years is a total money-grabbing, world-conforming disgrace.
@A Biblical View I Was a fan of Mr. White in the past. Remember that I already mentioned in my previous comment that I used to feel Bible study was some sort of academic pursuit. Unfortunately that is how Mr. White still approaches the Bible today, and it is evident in his preaching. I had enough of that when I was in the J. witness cult. I'm not attacking anyone's belief. If you re-read my comment, ALL I did was explain how blessed I have now been by reading the KJV instead.
When I was coming out of a spiritual stupor of many years, the ESV was the translation that spurred me to get it together and get back to Jesus. Since then, I've been alternating between the NKJV and the NASB 1995, and I'm very happy with both. I'd absolutely recommend the ESV for a new believer or someone who's adrift in the faith, and the NKJV and NASB '95 for more seasoned believers. As for the NIV...It's not a bad translation. I have a digital NIV 1984 on my phone and tablet. But I'd recommend that more for kids, as it's much easier reading.
I think its healthy if you're reading through a particular book, or even just a particular chapter in scripture, to read it in 4 or more translations, to compare how it reads. Especially I've found for Paul's Epistles where he can be difficult to actually understand what he is saying. Some translations will present a sentence in a way that it clicks and I understand a meaning in a way I couldn't with another translation. And even then, some passages or meanings of individual words aren't understood until I heard a sermon on a passage where the preacher dives into some words and explains the meaning of the greek word, and also explaining how the meaning of a word ment something different centuries or milenia ago as it does today. For example John McArthur has a sermon talking about our christian "adoption". And he explains how adoption back then ment to the Roman audience ment something significantly different than it does now. (A more significant meaning then than now)
@reidmason2551 you are correct those bibles you mentioned are great bible translations to use to stir someone up and bring them back to Christ... they are simplistic by nature and very front forward... but I have found if one... seriously wishes to grow and mature in the word of God... they need to get off of that "milk"... and feed on the "meat"... of the bible... which is the KJV... the more one compares the modern translations.. TO the KJV... the more one will see why this is true.. I am Not talking about poetry or style.. or flow of the KJV or any of that hogwash.. which keeps many of the superfluous readers happy in their KJV's... but the deep meanings.. and expressionisms.. found only in the KJV... learning the KJV .. is the difference between having a "heart".. knowledge... and a "head" knowledge for me.. through the way the KJV is presented... one can better understand the "heart of God... anyone can "KNOW".. the word.. but I believe there is More to it than that..
You don't have people saying that the ESV is the only accurate translation, or NKJV, or NASB. This is a thing that occurs only? with the KJV. I got saved on the old NIV, NKJV, and ESV. They are valid translations. They're actually better in some ways. (Using older manuscripts)
@@joev2223it’s because anyone who’s actually studied this extensively knows that they don’t all say the same thing. That’s why we defend Gods perfectly preserved word in the KJV.
@@davidchupp4460 you are right those who have studied this topic extensively know that modern translations are based on older and more reliable manuscript evidence it's funny how Satan uses the King James only crowd to attack the word of God and modern translations
That is 100% false the King James only crowd have been attacking modern translations for God knows how long and what you consider to be attacks on the King James are just responses to every other translation that you guys attack
Many adamantly hold to the "KJV Only" as being the only translation of the Bible to use. It seems that constantly new believers are running into this question and wrestling with the evidence of whether it is a valid argument or not. In this Bible Study Tim seeks to put forward the evidence that convinced him that the "KJV Only" position is not a stance that is being faithful to the evidence.
I stopped reading the KJV many years ago, before I even knew about the KJV only heresy. Because it is a heresy, with no scriptural authority. Not one verse supports this false teaching. God has really blessed me with these modern more accurate translations in English l can understand.
@@samlawrence2695false. They aren’t more accurate. Making salvation a process is more accurate? It’s the most important issue in anyones life. But yeah keep supporting the big lie.
@@samlawrence2695 you are correct in the fact that many bibles translations.. are great bible translations to use to stir someone up and bring them back to Christ... many are simplistic by nature and very front forward... but I have found if one... seriously wishes to grow and mature in the word of God... they need to get off of that "milk"... and feed on the "meat"... of the bible... which is the KJV... the more one compares the modern translations.. TO the KJV... the more one will see why this is true.. I am Not talking about poetry or style.. or flow of the KJV or any of that hogwash.. which keeps many of the superfluous readers happy in their KJV's... but the deep meanings.. and expressionisms.. found only in the KJV... learning the KJV .. is the difference between having a "heart".. knowledge... and a "head" knowledge for me.. through the way the KJV is presented... one can better understand the "heart of God... anyone can "KNOW".. the word.. but I believe there is More to it than that..
🛐🙏😭Heavenly Father JesusGod, I know that I am a sinner. I know that I deserve the consequences of my sin. However, I am trusting in Jesus Christ as my Savior. I believe that His death and resurrection provided for my forgiveness. I trust in Jesus and Jesus alone as my personal Lord and Savior. Thank you Lord, for saving me and forgiving me! In JesusMightyGod's holy name, Amen!" 💗❤❤💞This Gospel message if you continue to believe this message, you will be saved: For I delivered to you as of first importance what I also received: that Christ died for our sins in accordance with the Scriptures, that he was buried, that he was raised on the third day in accordance with the Scriptures, and that he appeared to Cephas, then to the twelve. Then he appeared to more than five hundred brothers at one time,
Are you suggesting that God preserved his word in the Old Testament in other languages other than Hebrew for Isreal??? So which language did he preserve it in??
A lot of the King James Only nonsense could be done away with if the KJV Onlyists would just believe what the King James translators say about their own translation in their Preface To The Reader. It used to be included in the KJV Bible but has been removed from most modern KJV Bibles. They were under no illusion that they were inspired as the original Biblical authors were and admitted that their translation would have errors (they call them warts) just as every translation before them had.
Amen brother I used to be King James only and the Holy Spirit started leading me out of that oddly enough by starting with the translators wrote in the preface to the King James and what they thought about not only their translation but future translations
@shawnglass108 what you are saying is no doubt true... but the KJV translation.. is a far cry better in revealing God's word.. (even with its faults)... than any Modern translation you can present...
@@jeffcarlson3269 , No..The KJV is far from the best English translation of the Bible. We have far more manuscript attestation today than Erasmus had in 1516. He used about 8 total manuscripts to make his Greek New Testament that the KJV is based on. We now have over 5,800 Greek manuscripts and several of them are far older and closer to the originals than the manuscript Erasmus had. His oldest manuscript was from the 10th century. His manuscripts also contained added verses that are not found in the earlier manuscripts. He didn’t even want to add 1 John 5:7 because he didn’t have a single manuscript that contained it. The Roman Catholic Church pressured him to add it. Because he was a Roman Catholic monastic priest. They even gave him a manuscript made right at the time he was making his New Testament to force him to add it. He knew he’d been had. He was right. His first two versions of his New Testament didn’t contain 1 John 5:7…The Textus Receptus has many unoriginal verses. That’s why almost no Christian New Testament scholars believe the KJV is the most accurate English Translation. As much as I love the KJV and my collection of KJV Bibles, it is simply not the best or most accurate English translation. The NASB, LSB, ESV, and CSB are all superior to the KJV.
@@shawnglass108it’s clear you have no done extensive research into this topic.. many claims you make are simply not true. Every single version you listed as being superior to the KJV all differ in some way, many ways.. So the question is what is the word of God in English? Because all of the modern versions have differences which take from or add to the Word of God. They have to. In order to obtain a new copyright they have to change it from the original…
@@TylerJames-yu5hf , It clear that you have not researched this subject and have been tricked into believing that the KJV is somehow a perfect English translation of the Greek, Hebrew, and Aramaic languages God used to originally give his word in writing. There is no absolutely perfect word for word translation of the Bible in any language. Nor can there possibly be. It is impossible to translate one language into another with perfect accuracy. Because languages contain words and phrases that are not easily rendered by another language or words that aren’t even found in other languages. That’s exactly why the King James translators made it clear, in their Preface To The Reader, that their translation would not be perfect and that it, like every translation before it, would have errors. They called them “warts”..but the KJV translators also said that even with “warts” that their translation and all the translations before theirs was the word of God. The King James translators would’ve been absolutely baffled by the ignorance of King James Onlyism. I have read more about and love the King James Bible more than anyone else you have probably ever met. It is an amazing and important translation. The most important translation in the English language..but it is absolutely not perfect and it is no longer the best translation. God has blessed us with an incredible amount of manuscript evidence and knowledge of Biblical languages that was unavailable to the KJV translators. I will ask you a very simple question. If you believe that a Bible must be “perfect” to actually be considered God’s Word (The KJV translators did not) then what was the perfect Bible that the church used before 1611?
this person goes on and on regarding why it is ok to read and use the modern translations.... but not ONCE does he attack the lies that were told in order to get people to use them... for ONE... the NKJV was introduced.....in order to make a good translation..(KJV)... BETTER... but they went far beyond that... not Only did they make it easier to understand?... by removing the archaic language of it... but they added some of their own words unnecessarily such as "palanquin"... Song of Solomon 3:9 "Waheb and Suphah"... Numbers 21:14 and the NKJV by removing the "thee's...thou's and ye's"... have eliminated our way of distinguishing exactly WHO or WHOM Jesus was addressing.. at any particular moment... by using the single word "YOU".. which can refer to plural OR singular..... now it is left unto the read themselves to make that distinction... here is an example... John 3:7 KJV "Marvel not that I said unto thee, Ye must be born again." in other words "Marvel Not that I said unto YOU, Nicodemus... All (EVERYONE)...must be born again..." THAT IS WHAT CHRIST SAID... here is what you get in the moderns.... Do not marvel that I said to you, ‘You must be born again.’
Nobody's trying to "downplay" the KJV. They're objecting to KJV-Onlyism, which is a cultish false doctrine. Nobody objects to people using the KJV as a personal preference, but they ARE objecting to the mentality that it's the only valid translation and that anything before or after is heretical.
@@reidmason2551 there is a reason for the KJV only mentality... it is NOT a cult lead by evil church leaders.... I would not say the KJV completely without error.either.... but the KJV is a far better translation in order to draw closer to God by.. than any other translation... I am a KJV onlyist... but even I have to admit the possibility of a scribal mis-copy..My thoughts on this is since God is Sovereign.. any (if any) errors are in the KJV it is because God allowed it for His purposes.. perhaps if for nothing else.. but to bring bible students closer to God by studying these parts in His word..,,..MORE FERVENTLY BTW.. I have NOT found any errors or contradictions in the KJV... but I have to realize that though the original manuscripts were penned by those whom "God breathed " upon... the copying and re copying was Not so guarded and for one purpose or another .. God allowed some things.. I know for a fact when matching some scripture from the KJV to the Hebrew or Greek that is known ...that ... some verses.. are very awkward.. due to the difference in the grammar of the foreign languages compared to English... some.. Hebrew or Greek does.. Not translate.. the same for example Acts 17:22 KJV "Then Paul stood in the midst of Mars' hill, and said, Ye men of Athens, I perceive that in all things ye are too superstitious." in the Greek the word used for "superstitious"... was "deisidaimonesterous" which actually means "demon dreading"... why did the KJV translators choose the word "superstitious".. instead of simply translation the Greek into the exact English meaning..? I do Not know... but this is one reason why when one reads the modern translations.. they state..."very religious ".. here... I still believe "too superstitious ".. is a better meaning than "very religious".. but it's Not exact... you are correct ...there are many bible translations to use to stir someone up and bring them to Christ... they are simplistic by nature and very front forward... but I have found if one... seriously wishes to grow and mature in the word of God... they need to get off of that "milk"... and feed on the "meat"... of the bible... which is the KJV... the more one compares the modern translations.. TO the KJV... the more one will see why this is true.. I am Not talking about poetry or style.. or flow of the KJV or any of that hogwash.. which keeps many of the superfluous readers happy in their KJV's... but the deep meanings.. and expressionisms.. found only in the KJV... learning the KJV .. is the difference between having a "heart".. knowledge... and a "head" knowledge for me.. through the way the KJV is presented... one can better understand the "heart of God... anyone can "KNOW".. the word.. but I believe there is More to it than that..
@@jeffcarlson3269 KJV Onlyism has no scriptural support nor is it backed by any solid evidence in favor of it being better than other translations. It's simply an English translation and as such is a tool to help us understand God's word. Anyone who limits their reading and study of the Bible to one single translations is severely dulling their ability to gain knowledge and understanding of God's word. God allowed men to continue the work of Bible translation for a reason. Languages change and more manuscripts have been discovered that help shine more light on God's word. My question is that if God can bring you closer to him through a 410 year old translations; why is he unable to do so with a translation in more contemporary English?
@@joesteele3159 I NEVER stated that KJV onlyism is scriptural.... I just happen to believe that the KJV is the ONLY translation that SHOULD be used by anyone serious about digging deeper into the word of God... You can continue to wallow in what ever translation you choose...but after spending 10 years changing back and forth from the KJV to the NKJV and vice - versa... my eyes were opened to some of the changed narratives of the NKJV.. so in 2006... I determined I would ONLY use the KJV.. to study and learn and grow from... i am Now attending a church that reads from the NASB and the NASB95.. and occasionally from the ESV... YUCK!... I cringe at the thought of having to sit thru.. the corruptions of those translations... and SOME people in my church even read from the NIV... I pray for them..! I have seen how bad and terrible these .. modern translations are over the years... using the original Greek and Hebrew writings to compare how they were translated... an have found these translators to be accursed... here is what Frank Logsdon St.. had to say about his part of the abomination of the NASB which he helped collaborate on for the Lockman Foundation back in the 1070's... here is the link ... read it for yourself from a modern translators OWN WORDS,,..: av1611.com/kjbp/articles/logsdon-repudiates-nasb.html or this link as well...: www.chick.com/information/article?id=logsdon-renounces-nasb
@@joesteele3159 I suggest you open your eyes to the deceit of the devil working in your midst... Yes God has allowed people to continue to translate ..newer renditions of His Word... but God also allowed satan to attack Job.. as well as men to thrive for over 100 years .. and taunt Noah.. while he was preparing the ark....... your hypothesis.. about God allowing it... is a weak excuse for trusting in the modern translations... did you ever happen to think.. that God is allowing the modern translations.. to sift this generation like wheat?.. Luke 22:31 31 And the Lord said, Simon, Simon, behold, Satan hath desired to have you, that he may sift you as wheat:
Sir, I don't see how you can believe in the inerrancy of Scripture and, yet, make no distinctions between the versions. The fact of the matter is that there are two families of texts: the Traditional Greek text, the one received by Bible-believing churches down through the centuries, starting with the Originals, then the first copies of the originals, the the first translations of these Scriptures, such as the Syrian Peshidda and the old Latin called the Itala Biblia or Italic spread throughout Europe and dirst translated around 150 AD, followed by the Gothic Bible among the Germanic tribes in the 300's. After this there were many other copies and translations of copies made by ancient churches like that of the Albigenses and the Waldenses. In the 1500's, the Reformation began, thanks primarily to Erasmus Greek/Latin New Testament. This sparked the Reformation and other translations like that of Luther, Coverdale, the Matthew's Bible, the Great Bible, the Geneva Bible, and the Bishop's Bible. Each of these, along with numerous Greek texts that were produced, were produced by Bible believing men who endeavored to translate from the same text, the Traditional Text. In 1611, with a number of later editions, the KJB was produced as the final refinement of the Traditional Text. On the other hand, there is the Critical Text, made from corrupt Greek Texts from Alexandria, the main center of Gnosticism of that day. The primary texts of this family is Codex Vaticanus and Cidex Siniaticus, which are not as they are reported to be: the oldest and best manuscripts. They were used by unbelieving apostates like Wescott and Hort. This us also the textual family that is used by the Critical Texts like that of the Nestle-Aland Greek Text. All of these are the foundation of every modern Greek texts. All this being said, there is a profit in having a diversity of English Bibles, but only if they are all faithful to the Traditional Text, something that the NKJV is not. Your arguments, I have to say, are old and illegitimate. Go to the King James Bible Research Council's RUclips channel, where you will find excellent videos that dispute almost everything you just said in this video. I was not always of this conviction, but I studied this issue for years before changing from a preference to the conviction for the KJV. LASTLY, the KJV language is more precise and will elevate your knowledge if you give it a chance. The modern versions also have words that most people do not regularly use. STICK WITH THE KJV. IT WON'T LET YOU DOWN.
@@4jgarner when I come across a word I do not know I look it up... I even bought a 2 Volume ..6000 page Oxford dictionary to help me.. if the words are too antiquated for the Webster's paperback...to help me with.... I do not believe in throwing out the "baby with the bathwater"... as the Modernists are so quick to do...
@@jeffcarlson3269 what about a word you aren't aware you don't know? Some words change meaning in a way they can be used similarly so we'll still think that we understood but we actually didn't. How do you combat that problem?
@@4jgarner that is why we must trust on the Sovereignty of God... here is what I believe.. I read through the entire book of Proverbs EVERY month.. as of now I have read Proverbs completely thru 30 times... I read each verse one verse at a time.. and try to allow it to "sink in"... while I am reading.. Many times while I am reading a verse.. I find a reason to stop as an idea or something I see in the word,,.. seems as if I have never read that meaning before.. that is how it is with certain words as well.. If for some reason I am given a cause to stop on a certain word.. I stop.. and look that word up to be certain I am getting the correct meaning.. also a little background... around 10 years ago... I began writing a daily journal....most days these are filled with new things I have learned from God's word.. over the years.. I have accumulated 4000 pages worth of notes.. I found that I needed to "catalogue".. this so I could read a verse and then I could find a previous note I wrote on it.. for instance if the note I wrote on Proverbs 2:3 is in Journal 4 on page 217...in my bible right closes to the verse I write J4P217.. so anytime I go to that verse .. I can be re inspired.. about what the Lord taught me about that verse even if it was years ago...... I am a third of the way thru volume 9 right now.. each journal contains 398 pages.. AND to help me decipher any unknown words correctly.... i purchased a 2 volume 6000 page Oxford dictionary about 3 years ago used of E-bay..with print so small it takes a magnifying glass to read it.. David W. Daniels has a shortened.. 20 page booklet titled "THE KING JAMES COMPANION"....which can be purchased fairly cheap on E-bay or Amazon... and I have found this to have contained definitions of up to 98% of the unknown words in it ' that would be a big help to you..
9:15 You make a good point here. Really it's a mix of ethnocentrism and possibly eurocentrism. People cling to their personal identifies far more than Jesus himself. I see it everywhere and many different things from physical appearance, culture, political groups etc. Speaking of Political The KJV was made due to politics. It's called King James Version for a reason. Before then the Geneva was the most popular. (Someone didn't like the anti corrupt gov authority of the bible and thought it best to make a King version of it.) Don't get me wrong though Most of the KJV and Geneva are similar tbh. But the KJV is political in nature. Carrying the KJVonlism is just an echo of the same issues that lead to its formation. English isn't that special.
One credit I must give old english, is that it has a different word for "you" when referring to an individual singular (you), or individuals plural (ye) Modern english doesn't differentiate between plural and singular intent when you say "you" Southern slang is correct, "yall" is a real word, reintroducing a plural 😆
I also have a leaf from an original 1611 KJV. It’s from the “she” edition which was printed between 1611 and 1613. It’s from the book of Acts. It has marginal notes. Not sure why or how anyone can argue that the 1611 didn’t contain marginal notes. It’s basic knowledge to anyone who studies English Bible history. The 1611 KJV Bible contained 8,422 marginal notes from the translators. A lot of the KJV only nonsense would end if people would read the KJV Translators Preface to the Reader. They were certainly under no illusion that they were inspired or that their Bible wouldn’t contain errors (they called them warts). They also believed all of the translations that came before theirs were the Word Of God.
What about the myth of "THE" Pastor, (brother) Tim? Why don't you be honest and cover 1 Cor. 11:17 through 14:40 kjv . ..the entire dissertation on the gathering "of the brethren"? And truly accept the fact that you are NOT gethering hiblically, and you are not a one man show? I dont hear other men prophesying in YOUR gatherings, 2-3 at a time, toll all men have prophesied, if lead by The Holy Spirit. I don't hear other men openiy judging each prophecy, whether its of God (OR NOT), in YOUR gatherings. Does your bible have 1 Cor. 11:17 through 14:40 in it? Do the right thing brother.
I love you brother and I have the upmost respect for you and I watch your videos daily. With that said, myth or not, the amount of men that gave their lives to bring you that hated king James. I also know for a fact that the other bibles take away the deity of christ. I know verses are ommited. I could go on and on. Those that were burned at the stake, beheaded, and brutally massacred for that bible means you give them dishonor by using any other. God is a bloody God. No one died to bring you the other versions. Again, I love you brother and will continue to watch your videos. But I'll stay with king james.
Every word of God is pure. People may be ok with mistakes in their version they read but God is not. Satan is not passive when it comes to changing Gods word .Anyone that studies the different bible versions can clearly see the blatant errors in the new modern versions. Genesis 3 shows how sin came into this world by adding to or taking from Gods word. In the book of Revelation God warns about taking from or adding to his words. He has a good reason for this. We live in a world today where everythig is acceptable. Why is the crowd that thinks we have to be rescued not talking about the translations that they know are not the least bit reliable?. Can you really trust a translation that comes out of manuscrips from Alexandria Egypt? The holy spirit is your guide to truth not your fleshly intelect. I have never been a member of a church that didnt hold to the KJV but I can tell you there are many I would not. 2 Sammuel 21:19 in most new translations says Elhanan killed Goliath? And these are the bibles the know it all scholars are recommending?
@@CoffeeBreakSomewherethe KJV Continued the work that began with the English translations. It is the standard or we wouldn’t even be having this conversation…
@@TylerJames-yu5hf the Geneva Bible was the Bible the Puritans brought over on the Mayflower.. it was complete but King James wanted to have his own because he didn't like the Geneva.. you truly can't see how your argument makes no sense. You refuse to give an actual Good explanation how a Bible that wasn't the first English Translation became the Standard. Have a good day.. I'm done
@@CoffeeBreakSomewhere Gods preservation has been a process that’s how… at least you admit that it is the standard. Why would I have to tell you why it’s the standard? All this argumentation against it why is it the one attacked? Interesting isn’t it.. fact is it is the standard and the one all others compete with.. You failed to tell me if you believe we have God’s word in English… obviously you don’t think so.. if you did then you’d have to choose which one that is as they are all different…
@@CoffeeBreakSomewhere you do know taking away would be taking away from God’s word not the KJV. Meaning there are two lines of texts. One line completely butchers Gods word. The other does not.
This is very helpful. I have been listening to a lot of KJV onlyist. I like to learn old english with KJV but many christian that love the kjv make so big deal out of it. We have older manuscript closer to the original.
The Minority Text contradicts itself. Look at 1 John 4:3 where it changes God's word to say "and every spirit that does not confess Jesus is not from God. This is the spirit of the antichrist". There are a number of times where demons confessed that Jesus was from God but what they didn't say was that Jesus Christ came in the flesh as the Majority Text says. God's Word doesn't contradict itself but a fake Bible would.
@@igregmart unless you can tell me using only scripture and nothing else where that Doctrine is taught then you are only teaching your own personal opinion
Which English Bible is the perfect word of God? What is your standard for the English Bible? Non-KJV people will not show me the perfect English Bible because they don't have one. They are still searching for it. I have it, it is the King James version, the English Bible for all English speaking people.
@igregmart well I would not say it is completely without error.. but the KJV is a far better translation in order to draw closer to God by.. than any other translation... I am a KJV onlyist... but even I have to admit the possibility of a scribal mis-copy..My thoughts on this is since God is Sovereign.. any (if any) errors are in the KJV it is because God allowed it for His purposes.. perhaps if for nothing else.. but to bring bible students closer to God by studying these parts in His word..,,.. BTW.. I have NOT found any errors or contradictions in the KJV... but I have to realize that though the original manuscripts were penned by those whom "God breathed " upon... the copying and re copying was Not so guarded and for one purpose or another .. God allowed some things.. I know for a fact when matching some scripture from the KJV to the Hebrew or Greek that is known ...that ... some verses.. are very awkward.. due to the difference in the grammar of the foreign languages compared to English... some.. Hebrew or Greek does.. Not translate.. the same for example Acts 17:22 KJV "Then Paul stood in the midst of Mars' hill, and said, Ye men of Athens, I perceive that in all things ye are too superstitious." in the Greek the word used for "superstitious"... was "deisidaimonesterous" which actually means "demon dreading"... why did the KJV translators choose the word "superstitious".. instead of simply translation the Greek into the exact English meaning..? I do Not know... but this is one reason why when one reads the modern translations.. they state..."very religious ".. here... I still believe "too superstitious ".. is a better meaning than "very religious".. but it's Not exact...
You can't hold to Bible inerrancy and believe that Majority Text Bibles, Minority Text Bibles, and the Septuagint are all inerrant. They have different words included, not included, and changed between those three Bibles. You have to decide which Bible is God's actual word and the Majority Text Bibles such as the KJV as the archeology and lack of contradictions within it to show it's genuine.
Well, then, which KJV is inerrant then? There's been many versions and updates over the KJVs history as well. Saying the bible is inerrant does not mean that a specific translation of the Bible is going to be completely inerrant
Here's a video with no real research. What about the words that have been changed from kjv to modern bibles. Revelation 1:11. Compare that one between them. You'll be surprised. New bibles remove the diety of Jesus saying all things were made through him, not by him. Even the new king james calls itself the crossover bible to get you ready for a newer corrupted version. Romans 3:25 is another one to compare. You need more research before making a video like this.
This is silly! New translations do not remove any verses. They just do not include verses that were added hundreds, or sometimes even thousands, of years after the original books were written. Modern Christian scholars who do these translations and the scholars that use them aren’t supporting translations that remove verses. The verses were not in the Greek Manuscripts to include. If anyone wants to understand this subject better then they should read James White’s book The King James Only Controversy. It uses factual evidence to dispose of the lies of the King James Only movement. There are also great videos here on RUclips debating KJV Onlyism. Watch the one here on RUclips done by the John Ankerberg Show. It’s got several scholars and editors of the Newer Bible translations and leaders in the KJV Only movement.
Why don't you defend the bible you prefer and not go against the KJV that has more power when you read it, otherwies move on and keep stumbling people in your phere and pay for your actions later.
I guess everyone is ok with taken whole verses out & changing words to completely change the meaning of verses in the only real bible KJ. You can call me a kj only all u want & guess what it doesn't bother me a bit because I believe in what the word of God says without any shadow of doubt. As long as u don't, u are gonna keep believing the Devil. Yeah, hath God said. Matthew 4:4, KJV: "But he answered and said, It is written, Man shall not live by bread alone, but by every word that proceedeth out of the mouth of God.
I'm not a KJV only person. Though I still use it as my primary study bible. Our standing with God should be based on our faith in Jesus Christ not the bible version we subscribed to. I have become concerned with a new movement - The modern translation only movement, which contends that the KJV is flawed. It shouldn't be used anymore. Here is a statement in the RSV preface 1952: The KJV has... been termed "the noblest monument of English prose." Its revisers in 1881 expressed admiration for "its simplicity, its dignity, its power, its happy turns of expression . . . the music of its cadences, and the felicities of its rhythm." It entered, as no other book has, into the making of the personal character and the public institutions of the English-speaking peoples. We owe to it an incalculable debt. YET THE KJV HAS GRAVE DEFECTS < If this isn't double speak I don't know what is. I have read (from the internet) figures of 150, 400 & 450 different English versions of the bible have been produced. If we average those figs. Its 335. Why do we need 335 different translations of the same book? 5, 10, 15 ok, maybe. its an important book. Important books warrant more than 1 translation. But 335? Plain reason and common sense should inform us that theological and economic motives are the primary reasons for this glut of translations. Is God the author of confusion? Its something to think about.
This guy is lost!!! Don't listen to him. The KJV Bible is the exact word of God in English!!! All the other versions are from the Vatican and they all omit scripture at some point. Do your research. Satan knows that the Remnant will feast and devour the Word of God!!! Satan isn't stupid!!! He has to come up a plan for those of us that dedicate ourselves to learning truth and if He can't get us away from the Bible,then,He just creates perversions of the perfect Bible!!! Nasb,Eiv,Nkjv,Etc. Don't be deceived!!! For Example if you look at the NASB Version it says there is now no condemnation to those who are in Christ Jesus.However,it omits the rest of the text. Which says who walk not after the Flesh but after the Spirit!!! Very Important. If you omit that part if the text,then,Christians can think that they can walk in the Flesh and not be condemned!!!
Those are really strong accusations to say Tim is spiritually "lost". I would encourage you to really listen again to what Tim shares. He is sharing as someone who used to lean heavily towards Textus Receptus Onlyist.
@@illbehonest Modern perversions only bring confusion. God is not the author of confusion. The truth is Satan is an enemy of the growth of the Christian in the knowledge of Jesus Christ, and has succeeded in doing so, (which is damnable by the way) by the multiplication of modern perversions based of scraps of scattered manuscripts from a myriad of places (including heretical sects) relegating text criticism, which Ligonier says is necessary to recover the authentic word from corrupt manuscripts, which essentially makes so called Christians dependent on the Scholarly guild to figure out what the authentic word of God is. Talk about a Magisterium! But we see that these modern perversions remove more and more, and criticize more and more of the text making it impossible for a believer to know what they can stand on, which is why there is this phenomenon of "secondary" issues, which basically widdles down the gospel to its most lowest common denominator to cover up the fact that none of these modern perversions, nor the text critics that compile them agree, which of course makes the commandment of Paul to be of one mind impossible! Now if you cannot see that this is the work of Satan, then I would question whether you are actually a believer, or merely a pretender, as Paul tells us there are "false brethren". Remember, that Jesus said man shall live by EVERY Word that proceedeth out of the mouth of God. But consider this, in Amos, there is a prophecy that in the latter days there would be a famine. But Lo! Not a famine of bread, but of the hearing of the Words of God! Only a fool would advocate for these modern perversions, and someone who does not love Christ believes the pack of lies you are telling. There is a place for people like you, and it's called hell, for Jesus warns against those who place a stumbling block before his little ones. Best read Revelation 22, there is a stern warning against tampering with the Word of God. To side with the modern perversions is to throw your lot in with those who corrupt, and pervert the Gospel, and 2 John warns the Christians about that as well. 2 John 2:10 If there come any unto you, and bring not this doctrine, receive him not into your house, neither bid him God speed: 11For he that biddeth him God speed is partaker of his evil deeds.
This man is WEAK!!! If the new modem bibles are better than the KJV why are the churches today such a mess. Answer, they have removed GOD's pure word the KJV bible.
So your saying the KJV only churches don't have any issues? Please tell me where I can find this perfect church, do you go there? Are you perfect? Is the pastor perfect? Are the Elders perfect? I'm not sure I should go I'm not perfect!
@@NLASMINISTRY we will Never find a perfect church this side of heaven.. and by then we won't need one... since we'll be in God's presence.... BUT I can say over the years... by reading the KJV.. bible over the years.. it has kept me OUT of any messes.. and has even blinded me to messes going on... so in that sense.. I have remained pure and undefiled in church issues I have never been involved in any disputes at any churches I have been a member of nor privy to any... though over the years I have heard several tales of church immorality.. theft.. and other sins... but I have found these things out after the issues have been dealt with.. one time a deacon who once discipled me confessed with tears in his eyes.. that he needed to step down from being a deacon.. and he and his family joined another church.. that happened close to 20 years ago... I Never did know what happened.. I thank God for the KJV for keeping me undefiled in any of that,,,.
The churches are a mess largely due to idolatry. The biggest one imo is the institutional structure (the one King James was in support of btw and one aspect of why we have the KJV to begin with) The church is the people not the building. But institutionalism has the church as the building. The early christians gathered in homes and did not have people lording over them (as Jesus told us not to do). They were all brothers (and sisters of course). Jesus was the only head. Elders/pastors were a plurality. They were as older sheep in the flock, but Jesus was the one and only head. We are his flock not any man's flock. Churches were formed first. A group of believers. Then later multiple elders/pastors were made. Not lording over people. Everyone participated and not a few. They were like family gatherings and not 1 day a weel sermons. Institutionalism (which again KJ supported) crept in. First with the Chatolic church harlot system, then the Chatolic churches harlot children who adopted the same systems. The same clergy vs laity system.
Inerrant Word of God, we have the preserved Word of God. Okay, in 2023 which translation is CORRECT in English for Exodus 25? Simple question, got an answer?
The preserved word of God is in the original Hebrew, Aramaic, and Greek. Any English translation is just that, a translation. Bad faith "gotcha" questions do nobody any good.
@@reidmason2551 first off many of the bible versions presented before the KJV were Not supported by either the Clergy...Church of England... or the Monarchy...' thank God.. that He placed King James on the throne... and gave that man a heart that wanted to establish a bible for Common usage throughout all of the churches in England.. that was devoid of most of the Roman Catholic.. influence in it... many of those pre KJV translations.. were the work by less than a handful of individuals.. working in hiding.. so as Not to be executed..(which many such as Wycliffe were anyway)....and distributed in limited supply... as to Not considered something common.. BUT the KJV bible had at least 47 bible scholars... knowledgeable in Latin Greek.. Hebrew.. as well as many were able to incorporate early manuscripts..... and ALSO... this did NOT have to be done in secret... AND it took several years to accomplish due to those wishing to be so thorough in their endeavors... another thing those such as Tyndale and Wycliffe and Coverdale.. did Not have in their favor...
What is so sad, is this fine Christian man states something he doesn't believe..... My question to him is, please, please hand me a 'copy' of this perfect, infallible, inerrant and inspired word of God you say you believe in? Where, in any translation, does it say the 'originals' are perfect and infallible? It is so sad to hear a person like him.... So sad! This man doesn't know the issues..... Saved, yes... 'Bible' believer, no......
This man knows perfectly well what's he's talking about. You just don't like what he has to say and want to discredit him for it. You -- and many others commenting on this video -- are exactly the kind of people he's rebuking. The self-righteous, arrogant people who make bad-faith arguments and look down on anyone who doesn't subscribe to your personal tastes. This is not what any Christian should be doing.
@@reidmason2551 All you have to do is ask him a simple question.... Can you hand me a perfect infallible Bible? And watch the whole thing come undone..... Have a nice day😁
@@samlawrence2695 Yes I can hand you a copy of this perfect word of God..... Prove conclusively that the King James Bible is not a perfect infallible verbatim reproduction of the originals..... I am waiting...:) It is innocent till proved guilty.....
@@Kingjamesbible6111 Which KJV? The 1611 with the apocrypha? The Oxford? The Cambridge? Which differ from each other. Or one of the different revisions which differ from each other. Which one is the "perfect" word of God? Not the KJV where so many words have changed meaning, making the archaic KJV even more inaccurate. The KJV translators knew their work was not perfect. They said that even the meanest translation is still the word of God. . The KJV only cult in their delusions pride and arrogance think they know better. No you cannot show me a "perfect" Bible" just your fantasies. KJV onlyism is another gospel which has no scriptural support. Not one verse supports this heresy which is a man made tradition. Another gospel which KJV onlyism is. According to scripture is the spirit of divination or witchcraft. Sums up the KJV only deception completely. Just an afterthought I do not have to prove anything. Because I am not the one making the ludicrous rediculous claims about the KJV that you are. It is up to you to prove conclusively that the KJV is the "perfect" word of God in English. Also which of the different revisions of the KJV is the "perfect" word of God in English. Please provide chapter and verse from the scripture where God said it. That we would have to wait 1600 years after the insured scripture was completed. To have the so called "perfect" word of God in English I know you can't because there is not one. Exposing all your silly arguments for what they are. Just your delusions.
You're disregarding every English translation that predates the KJV, as well as disowning the original language manuscripts, as "perversions." Think about how wrongheaded that sounds.
I read and studied from modern translations for decades after God saved me out of the Jehova's witness cult.
I didn't really give much thought to this Bible version question at all for many years. All I knew is I had to stay away from the perverted NWT that is printed by the Jehovah witnesses.
I have to say that from personal experience, once I gave the Authorized version (KJV), the word of God took on a different kind of power in my life. I read it more. I meditate on it more. The weight of the words is heavier in my heart. It just changed my whole attitude toward the Bible.
No matter how I tried with my NASB, it always felt more like an academic pursuit, rather than communing with God and hearing his words.
A recent encounter with several charts doing side by side, verse by verse comparisons between the Authorized version and NIV, NASB, NKJV, ESV and several others was just really shocking to me. It completely solidified my resolve to avoid the constantly changing modern versions.
This modern trend of updating Bible translations every few years to fit modern feministic, homosexual and gender neutral ideology would completely lose its grip on the Church if we all switched back to the KJV.
Just the 2 cents from someone who has been greatly blesses by switching to the Bible translation that the post-reformers and later on the great puritan preachers and writers used, continuing on to be the lamp to the feet of believers all the way through the end of the 1980s and '90s.
What has been done to english Bible translation in the last 30 years is a total money-grabbing, world-conforming disgrace.
thank you!
Go listen to James White for the truth of the matter.
@A Biblical View I Was a fan of Mr. White in the past. Remember that I already mentioned in my previous comment that I used to feel Bible study was some sort of academic pursuit. Unfortunately that is how Mr. White still approaches the Bible today, and it is evident in his preaching. I had enough of that when I was in the J. witness cult. I'm not attacking anyone's belief. If you re-read my comment, ALL I did was explain how blessed I have now been by reading the KJV instead.
There really is a difference
@@DesignInNature Great testimony brother.
When I was coming out of a spiritual stupor of many years, the ESV was the translation that spurred me to get it together and get back to Jesus. Since then, I've been alternating between the NKJV and the NASB 1995, and I'm very happy with both. I'd absolutely recommend the ESV for a new believer or someone who's adrift in the faith, and the NKJV and NASB '95 for more seasoned believers.
As for the NIV...It's not a bad translation. I have a digital NIV 1984 on my phone and tablet. But I'd recommend that more for kids, as it's much easier reading.
I think its healthy if you're reading through a particular book, or even just a particular chapter in scripture, to read it in 4 or more translations, to compare how it reads. Especially I've found for Paul's Epistles where he can be difficult to actually understand what he is saying. Some translations will present a sentence in a way that it clicks and I understand a meaning in a way I couldn't with another translation.
And even then, some passages or meanings of individual words aren't understood until I heard a sermon on a passage where the preacher dives into some words and explains the meaning of the greek word, and also explaining how the meaning of a word ment something different centuries or milenia ago as it does today.
For example John McArthur has a sermon talking about our christian "adoption". And he explains how adoption back then ment to the Roman audience ment something significantly different than it does now. (A more significant meaning then than now)
Those are my two preferred translation also.
@reidmason2551
you are correct those bibles you mentioned are great bible translations to use to stir someone up and bring them back to Christ... they are simplistic by nature and very front forward... but I have found if one... seriously wishes to grow and mature in the word of God... they need to get off of that "milk"... and feed on the "meat"... of the bible... which is the KJV...
the more one compares the modern translations.. TO the KJV... the more one will see why this is true..
I am Not talking about poetry or style.. or flow of the KJV or any of that hogwash.. which keeps many of the superfluous readers happy in their KJV's... but the deep meanings.. and expressionisms.. found only in the KJV...
learning the KJV .. is the difference between having a "heart".. knowledge... and a "head" knowledge for me.. through the way the KJV is presented... one can better understand the "heart of God...
anyone can "KNOW".. the word.. but I believe there is More to it than that..
The ONLY TRANSLATION which is repeatedly attacked by demonic forces. Wonder why???
You don't have people saying that the ESV is the only accurate translation, or NKJV, or NASB. This is a thing that occurs only? with the KJV. I got saved on the old NIV, NKJV, and ESV. They are valid translations. They're actually better in some ways. (Using older manuscripts)
@@joev2223it’s because anyone who’s actually studied this extensively knows that they don’t all say the same thing. That’s why we defend Gods perfectly preserved word in the KJV.
@@davidchupp4460 you are right those who have studied this topic extensively know that modern translations are based on older and more reliable manuscript evidence it's funny how Satan uses the King James only crowd to attack the word of God and modern translations
That is 100% false the King James only crowd have been attacking modern translations for God knows how long and what you consider to be attacks on the King James are just responses to every other translation that you guys attack
@@davidchupp4460 when exactly did it become perfect?
Many adamantly hold to the "KJV Only" as being the only translation of the Bible to use. It seems that constantly new believers are running into this question and wrestling with the evidence of whether it is a valid argument or not. In this Bible Study Tim seeks to put forward the evidence that convinced him that the "KJV Only" position is not a stance that is being faithful to the evidence.
I stopped reading the KJV many years ago, before I even knew about the KJV only heresy. Because it is a heresy, with no scriptural authority. Not one verse supports this false teaching. God has really blessed me with these modern more accurate translations in English l can understand.
@@samlawrence2695false. They aren’t more accurate. Making salvation a process is more accurate? It’s the most important issue in anyones life. But yeah keep supporting the big lie.
@@samlawrence2695
you are correct in the fact that many bibles translations.. are great bible translations to use to stir someone up and bring them back to Christ... many are simplistic by nature and very front forward... but I have found if one... seriously wishes to grow and mature in the word of God... they need to get off of that "milk"... and feed on the "meat"... of the bible... which is the KJV...
the more one compares the modern translations.. TO the KJV... the more one will see why this is true..
I am Not talking about poetry or style.. or flow of the KJV or any of that hogwash.. which keeps many of the superfluous readers happy in their KJV's... but the deep meanings.. and expressionisms.. found only in the KJV...
learning the KJV .. is the difference between having a "heart".. knowledge... and a "head" knowledge for me.. through the way the KJV is presented... one can better understand the "heart of God...
anyone can "KNOW".. the word.. but I believe there is More to it than that..
🛐🙏😭Heavenly Father JesusGod, I know that I am a sinner. I know that I deserve the consequences of my sin. However, I am trusting in Jesus Christ as my Savior. I believe that His death and resurrection provided for my forgiveness. I trust in Jesus and Jesus alone as my personal Lord and Savior. Thank you Lord, for saving me and forgiving me! In JesusMightyGod's holy name, Amen!"
💗❤❤💞This Gospel message if you continue to believe this message, you will be saved: For I delivered to you as of first importance what I also received: that Christ died for our sins in accordance with the Scriptures, that he was buried, that he was raised on the third day in accordance with the Scriptures, and that he appeared to Cephas, then to the twelve. Then he appeared to more than five hundred brothers at one time,
Are you suggesting that God preserved his word in the Old Testament in other languages other than Hebrew for Isreal??? So which language did he preserve it in??
A lot of the King James Only nonsense could be done away with if the KJV Onlyists would just believe what the King James translators say about their own translation in their Preface To The Reader. It used to be included in the KJV Bible but has been removed from most modern KJV Bibles. They were under no illusion that they were inspired as the original Biblical authors were and admitted that their translation would have errors (they call them warts) just as every translation before them had.
Amen brother I used to be King James only and the Holy Spirit started leading me out of that oddly enough by starting with the translators wrote in the preface to the King James and what they thought about not only their translation but future translations
@shawnglass108
what you are saying is no doubt true... but the KJV translation.. is a far cry better in revealing God's word.. (even with its faults)... than any Modern translation you can present...
@@jeffcarlson3269 , No..The KJV is far from the best English translation of the Bible. We have far more manuscript attestation today than Erasmus had in 1516. He used about 8 total manuscripts to make his Greek New Testament that the KJV is based on. We now have over 5,800 Greek manuscripts and several of them are far older and closer to the originals than the manuscript Erasmus had. His oldest manuscript was from the 10th century. His manuscripts also contained added verses that are not found in the earlier manuscripts. He didn’t even want to add 1 John 5:7 because he didn’t have a single manuscript that contained it. The Roman Catholic Church pressured him to add it. Because he was a Roman Catholic monastic priest. They even gave him a manuscript made right at the time he was making his New Testament to force him to add it. He knew he’d been had. He was right. His first two versions of his New Testament didn’t contain 1 John 5:7…The Textus Receptus has many unoriginal verses. That’s why almost no Christian New Testament scholars believe the KJV is the most accurate English Translation. As much as I love the KJV and my collection of KJV Bibles, it is simply not the best or most accurate English translation. The NASB, LSB, ESV, and CSB are all superior to the KJV.
@@shawnglass108it’s clear you have no done extensive research into this topic.. many claims you make are simply not true.
Every single version you listed as being superior to the KJV all differ in some way, many ways..
So the question is what is the word of God in English? Because all of the modern versions have differences which take from or add to the Word of God. They have to. In order to obtain a new copyright they have to change it from the original…
@@TylerJames-yu5hf , It clear that you have not researched this subject and have been tricked into believing that the KJV is somehow a perfect English translation of the Greek, Hebrew, and Aramaic languages God used to originally give his word in writing. There is no absolutely perfect word for word translation of the Bible in any language. Nor can there possibly be. It is impossible to translate one language into another with perfect accuracy. Because languages contain words and phrases that are not easily rendered by another language or words that aren’t even found in other languages. That’s exactly why the King James translators made it clear, in their Preface To The Reader, that their translation would not be perfect and that it, like every translation before it, would have errors. They called them “warts”..but the KJV translators also said that even with “warts” that their translation and all the translations before theirs was the word of God. The King James translators would’ve been absolutely baffled by the ignorance of King James Onlyism. I have read more about and love the King James Bible more than anyone else you have probably ever met. It is an amazing and important translation. The most important translation in the English language..but it is absolutely not perfect and it is no longer the best translation. God has blessed us with an incredible amount of manuscript evidence and knowledge of Biblical languages that was unavailable to the KJV translators. I will ask you a very simple question. If you believe that a Bible must be “perfect” to actually be considered God’s Word (The KJV translators did not) then what was the perfect Bible that the church used before 1611?
We need to return back to the Holy Spirit as He will guide us in all truth
Faith cometh by hearing, and by hearing the word of God. genesis 15:6
this person goes on and on regarding why it is ok to read and use the modern translations.... but not ONCE does he attack the lies that were told in order to get people to use them...
for ONE... the NKJV was introduced.....in order to make a good translation..(KJV)... BETTER... but they went far beyond that... not Only did they make it easier to understand?... by removing the archaic language of it... but they added some of their own words unnecessarily such as
"palanquin"... Song of Solomon 3:9
"Waheb and Suphah"... Numbers 21:14
and the NKJV by removing the "thee's...thou's and ye's"... have eliminated our way of distinguishing exactly WHO or WHOM Jesus was addressing.. at any particular moment...
by using the single word "YOU".. which can refer to plural OR singular..... now it is left unto the read themselves to make that distinction... here is an example...
John 3:7
KJV
"Marvel not that I said unto thee, Ye must be born again."
in other words "Marvel Not that I said unto YOU, Nicodemus... All (EVERYONE)...must be born again..."
THAT IS WHAT CHRIST SAID...
here is what you get in the moderns....
Do not marvel that I said to you, ‘You must be born again.’
Beware of anyone trying to downplay the kjv. Much more transliteration in newer versions.
Nobody's trying to "downplay" the KJV. They're objecting to KJV-Onlyism, which is a cultish false doctrine. Nobody objects to people using the KJV as a personal preference, but they ARE objecting to the mentality that it's the only valid translation and that anything before or after is heretical.
@@reidmason2551
there is a reason for the KJV only mentality... it is NOT a cult lead by evil church leaders....
I would not say the KJV completely without error.either.... but the KJV is a far better translation in order to draw closer to God by.. than any other translation... I am a KJV onlyist... but even I have to admit the possibility of a scribal mis-copy..My thoughts on this is since God is Sovereign.. any (if any) errors are in the KJV it is because God allowed it for His purposes..
perhaps if for nothing else.. but to bring bible students closer to God by studying these parts in His word..,,..MORE FERVENTLY
BTW.. I have NOT found any errors or contradictions in the KJV...
but I have to realize that though the original manuscripts were penned by those whom "God breathed " upon... the copying and re copying was Not so guarded and for one purpose or another .. God allowed some things..
I know for a fact when matching some scripture from the KJV to the Hebrew or Greek that is known ...that ... some verses.. are very awkward.. due to the difference in the grammar of the foreign languages compared to English...
some.. Hebrew or Greek does.. Not translate.. the same
for example Acts 17:22 KJV
"Then Paul stood in the midst of Mars' hill, and said, Ye men of Athens, I perceive that in all things ye are too superstitious."
in the Greek the word used for "superstitious"... was
"deisidaimonesterous"
which actually means "demon dreading"... why did the KJV translators choose the word "superstitious".. instead of simply translation the Greek into the exact English meaning..?
I do Not know... but this is one reason why when one reads the modern translations.. they state..."very religious ".. here...
I still believe "too superstitious ".. is a better meaning than "very religious".. but it's Not exact...
you are correct ...there are many bible translations to use to stir someone up and bring them to Christ... they are simplistic by nature and very front forward... but I have found if one... seriously wishes to grow and mature in the word of God... they need to get off of that "milk"... and feed on the "meat"... of the bible... which is the KJV...
the more one compares the modern translations.. TO the KJV... the more one will see why this is true..
I am Not talking about poetry or style.. or flow of the KJV or any of that hogwash.. which keeps many of the superfluous readers happy in their KJV's... but the deep meanings.. and expressionisms.. found only in the KJV...
learning the KJV .. is the difference between having a "heart".. knowledge... and a "head" knowledge for me.. through the way the KJV is presented... one can better understand the "heart of God...
anyone can "KNOW".. the word.. but I believe there is More to it than that..
@@jeffcarlson3269 KJV Onlyism has no scriptural support nor is it backed by any solid evidence in favor of it being better than other translations. It's simply an English translation and as such is a tool to help us understand God's word. Anyone who limits their reading and study of the Bible to one single translations is severely dulling their ability to gain knowledge and understanding of God's word. God allowed men to continue the work of Bible translation for a reason. Languages change and more manuscripts have been discovered that help shine more light on God's word. My question is that if God can bring you closer to him through a 410 year old translations; why is he unable to do so with a translation in more contemporary English?
@@joesteele3159
I NEVER stated that KJV onlyism is scriptural....
I just happen to believe that the KJV is the ONLY translation that SHOULD be used by anyone serious about digging deeper into the word of God...
You can continue to wallow in what ever translation you choose...but after spending 10 years changing back and forth from the KJV to the NKJV and vice - versa... my eyes were opened to some of the changed narratives of the NKJV.. so in 2006... I determined I would ONLY use the KJV.. to study and learn and grow from...
i am Now attending a church that reads from the NASB and the NASB95.. and occasionally from the ESV... YUCK!... I cringe at the thought of having to sit thru.. the corruptions of those translations... and SOME people in my church even read from the NIV... I pray for them..!
I have seen how bad and terrible these .. modern translations are over the years... using the original Greek and Hebrew writings to compare how they were translated... an have found these translators to be accursed...
here is what Frank Logsdon St.. had to say about his part of the abomination of the NASB which he helped collaborate on for the Lockman Foundation back in the 1070's...
here is the link ... read it for yourself from a modern translators OWN WORDS,,..:
av1611.com/kjbp/articles/logsdon-repudiates-nasb.html
or this link as well...:
www.chick.com/information/article?id=logsdon-renounces-nasb
@@joesteele3159
I suggest you open your eyes to the deceit of the devil working in your midst...
Yes God has allowed people to continue to translate ..newer renditions of His Word... but God also allowed satan to attack Job.. as well as men to thrive for over 100 years .. and taunt Noah.. while he was preparing the ark.......
your hypothesis.. about God allowing it... is a weak excuse for trusting in the modern translations...
did you ever happen to think.. that God is allowing the modern translations.. to sift this generation like wheat?..
Luke 22:31
31 And the Lord said, Simon, Simon, behold, Satan hath desired to have you, that he may sift you as wheat:
Anyone have a reference to the document he's reading from?
It's a script of his own personal composition
Sir, I don't see how you can believe in the inerrancy of Scripture and, yet, make no distinctions between the versions. The fact of the matter is that there are two families of texts: the Traditional Greek text, the one received by Bible-believing churches down through the centuries, starting with the Originals, then the first copies of the originals, the the first translations of these Scriptures, such as the Syrian Peshidda and the old Latin called the Itala Biblia or Italic spread throughout Europe and dirst translated around 150 AD, followed by the Gothic Bible among the Germanic tribes in the 300's. After this there were many other copies and translations of copies made by ancient churches like that of the Albigenses and the Waldenses. In the 1500's, the Reformation began, thanks primarily to Erasmus Greek/Latin New Testament. This sparked the Reformation and other translations like that of Luther, Coverdale, the Matthew's Bible, the Great Bible, the Geneva Bible, and the Bishop's Bible. Each of these, along with numerous Greek texts that were produced, were produced by Bible believing men who endeavored to translate from the same text, the Traditional Text. In 1611, with a number of later editions, the KJB was produced as the final refinement of the Traditional Text.
On the other hand, there is the Critical Text, made from corrupt Greek Texts from Alexandria, the main center of Gnosticism of that day. The primary texts of this family is Codex Vaticanus and Cidex Siniaticus, which are not as they are reported to be: the oldest and best manuscripts. They were used by unbelieving apostates like Wescott and Hort. This us also the textual family that is used by the Critical Texts like that of the Nestle-Aland Greek Text. All of these are the foundation of every modern Greek texts.
All this being said, there is a profit in having a diversity of English Bibles, but only if they are all faithful to the Traditional Text, something that the NKJV is not.
Your arguments, I have to say, are old and illegitimate. Go to the King James Bible Research Council's RUclips channel, where you will find excellent videos that dispute almost everything you just said in this video. I was not always of this conviction, but I studied this issue for years before changing from a preference to the conviction for the KJV.
LASTLY, the KJV language is more precise and will elevate your knowledge if you give it a chance. The modern versions also have words that most people do not regularly use. STICK WITH THE KJV. IT WON'T LET YOU DOWN.
Do you regularly use besom?
@@4jgarner when I come across a word I do not know I look it up... I even bought a 2 Volume ..6000 page Oxford dictionary to help me.. if the words are too antiquated for the Webster's paperback...to help me with....
I do not believe in throwing out the "baby with the bathwater"... as the Modernists are so quick to do...
@@jeffcarlson3269 what about a word you aren't aware you don't know? Some words change meaning in a way they can be used similarly so we'll still think that we understood but we actually didn't. How do you combat that problem?
@@4jgarner
that is why we must trust on the Sovereignty of God... here is what I believe..
I read through the entire book of Proverbs EVERY month.. as of now I have read Proverbs completely thru 30 times...
I read each verse one verse at a time.. and try to allow it to "sink in"... while I am reading..
Many times while I am reading a verse.. I find a reason to stop as an idea or something I see in the word,,.. seems as if I have never read that meaning before.. that is how it is with certain words as well..
If for some reason I am given a cause to stop on a certain word.. I stop.. and look that word up to be certain I am getting the correct meaning..
also a little background... around 10 years ago... I began writing a daily journal....most days these are filled with new things I have learned from God's word.. over the years.. I have accumulated 4000 pages worth of notes.. I found that I needed to "catalogue".. this so I could read a verse and then I could find a previous note I wrote on it..
for instance if the note I wrote on Proverbs 2:3 is in Journal 4 on page 217...in my bible right closes to the verse I write J4P217.. so anytime I go to that verse .. I can be re inspired.. about what the Lord taught me about that verse even if it was years ago......
I am a third of the way thru volume 9 right now.. each journal contains 398 pages..
AND to help me decipher any unknown words correctly.... i purchased a 2 volume 6000 page Oxford dictionary about 3 years ago used of E-bay..with print so small it takes a magnifying glass to read it..
David W. Daniels has a shortened.. 20 page booklet titled "THE KING JAMES COMPANION"....which can be purchased fairly cheap on E-bay or Amazon... and I have found this to have contained definitions of up to 98% of the unknown words in it '
that would be a big help to you..
Somebody who knows what’s up right here. Good on you @jacktaot177
9:15
You make a good point here.
Really it's a mix of ethnocentrism and possibly eurocentrism.
People cling to their personal identifies far more than Jesus himself.
I see it everywhere and many different things from physical appearance, culture, political groups etc.
Speaking of Political
The KJV was made due to politics. It's called King James Version for a reason.
Before then the Geneva was the most popular.
(Someone didn't like the anti corrupt gov authority of the bible and thought it best to make a King version of it.)
Don't get me wrong though
Most of the KJV and Geneva are similar tbh.
But the KJV is political in nature.
Carrying the KJVonlism is just an echo of the same issues that lead to its formation.
English isn't that special.
One credit I must give old english, is that it has a different word for "you" when referring to an individual singular (you), or individuals plural (ye)
Modern english doesn't differentiate between plural and singular intent when you say "you"
Southern slang is correct, "yall" is a real word, reintroducing a plural 😆
Good point.
Thee or thou is singular, ye means nothing.. you is plural
I also have a leaf from an original 1611 KJV. It’s from the “she” edition which was printed between 1611 and 1613. It’s from the book of Acts. It has marginal notes. Not sure why or how anyone can argue that the 1611 didn’t contain marginal notes. It’s basic knowledge to anyone who studies English Bible history. The 1611 KJV Bible contained 8,422 marginal notes from the translators. A lot of the KJV only nonsense would end if people would read the KJV Translators Preface to the Reader. They were certainly under no illusion that they were inspired or that their Bible wouldn’t contain errors (they called them warts). They also believed all of the translations that came before theirs were the Word Of God.
What about the myth of "THE" Pastor, (brother) Tim?
Why don't you be honest and cover 1 Cor. 11:17 through 14:40 kjv . ..the entire dissertation on the gathering "of the brethren"?
And truly accept the fact that you are NOT gethering hiblically, and you are not a one man show?
I dont hear other men prophesying in YOUR gatherings, 2-3 at a time, toll all men have prophesied, if lead by The Holy Spirit.
I don't hear other men openiy judging each prophecy, whether its of God (OR NOT), in YOUR gatherings.
Does your bible have 1 Cor. 11:17 through 14:40 in it? Do the right thing brother.
24:21 2 percent difference accuracy level
35:00 over 98 percent
Thank u pastor hallelujah amen ♥️♥️💕💕💕♥️
I love you brother and I have the upmost respect for you and I watch your videos daily. With that said, myth or not, the amount of men that gave their lives to bring you that hated king James. I also know for a fact that the other bibles take away the deity of christ. I know verses are ommited. I could go on and on. Those that were burned at the stake, beheaded, and brutally massacred for that bible means you give them dishonor by using any other. God is a bloody God. No one died to bring you the other versions. Again, I love you brother and will continue to watch your videos. But I'll stay with king james.
People once believed the bible shouldn't be translated into english at all.
Every word of God is pure. People may be ok with mistakes in their version they read but God is not. Satan is not passive when it comes to changing Gods word .Anyone that studies the different bible versions can clearly see the blatant errors in the new modern versions. Genesis 3 shows how sin came into this world by adding to or taking from Gods word. In the book of Revelation God warns about taking from or adding to his words. He has a good reason for this. We live in a world today where everythig is acceptable. Why is the crowd that thinks we have to be rescued not talking about the translations that they know are not the least bit reliable?. Can you really trust a translation that comes out of manuscrips from Alexandria Egypt? The holy spirit is your guide to truth not your fleshly intelect. I have never been a member of a church that didnt hold to the KJV but I can tell you there are many I would not. 2 Sammuel 21:19 in most new translations says Elhanan killed Goliath? And these are the bibles the know it all scholars are recommending?
The new versions taking verses out was the deal breaker for me.
For them to take verses out then you're saying the KJV is the standard.. what makes it the standard? It's not the first English Translation
@@CoffeeBreakSomewherethe KJV Continued the work that began with the English translations. It is the standard or we wouldn’t even be having this conversation…
@@TylerJames-yu5hf the Geneva Bible was the Bible the Puritans brought over on the Mayflower.. it was complete but King James wanted to have his own because he didn't like the Geneva.. you truly can't see how your argument makes no sense. You refuse to give an actual Good explanation how a Bible that wasn't the first English Translation became the Standard. Have a good day.. I'm done
@@CoffeeBreakSomewhere Gods preservation has been a process that’s how… at least you admit that it is the standard. Why would I have to tell you why it’s the standard? All this argumentation against it why is it the one attacked? Interesting isn’t it.. fact is it is the standard and the one all others compete with..
You failed to tell me if you believe we have God’s word in English… obviously you don’t think so.. if you did then you’d have to choose which one that is as they are all different…
@@CoffeeBreakSomewhere you do know taking away would be taking away from God’s word not the KJV. Meaning there are two lines of texts. One line completely butchers Gods word. The other does not.
All the versions are different, which one is correct, it can only be one and that perfect word in English is the kjv. Everyone says
Everyone says their not attracting God's word and then that's exactly what they do.
This is very helpful. I have been listening to a lot of KJV onlyist. I like to learn old english with KJV but many christian that love the kjv make so big deal out of it. We have older manuscript closer to the original.
What older manuscripts you referring to specifically?
The Minority Text contradicts itself. Look at 1 John 4:3 where it changes God's word to say "and every spirit that does not confess Jesus is not from God. This is the spirit of the antichrist". There are a number of times where demons confessed that Jesus was from God but what they didn't say was that Jesus Christ came in the flesh as the Majority Text says. God's Word doesn't contradict itself but a fake Bible would.
No one has had all the originals at one time. The originals argument is a sophistry argument for those who doubt the doctrine of preservation
@@BiblicalTeachings Daniel Wallace is not the final authority. Only God is.
I just want Gods word in truth.
the KJV it is, the words of God don't be deceived by a calvanist. Believe on the Lord Jesus Christ and thou shalt be saved
man is justified by grace through faith romans 4:5 "to him that worketh not".
Amen. The King James Bible is THE HOLY BIBLE for all English speaking people.
@@igregmart unless you can tell me using only scripture and nothing else where that Doctrine is taught then you are only teaching your own personal opinion
@@igregmart oh and that scripture has to point to the King James in some way
This poor man😢
This poor man....who...?
@@illbehonest
this straw man.... I can say something silly as well..lol
Which English Bible is the perfect word of God? What is your standard for the English Bible? Non-KJV people will not show me the perfect English Bible because they don't have one. They are still searching for it. I have it, it is the King James version, the English Bible for all English speaking people.
@igregmart
well I would not say it is completely without error.. but the KJV is a far better translation in order to draw closer to God by.. than any other translation... I am a KJV onlyist... but even I have to admit the possibility of a scribal mis-copy..My thoughts on this is since God is Sovereign.. any (if any) errors are in the KJV it is because God allowed it for His purposes..
perhaps if for nothing else.. but to bring bible students closer to God by studying these parts in His word..,,..
BTW.. I have NOT found any errors or contradictions in the KJV...
but I have to realize that though the original manuscripts were penned by those whom "God breathed " upon... the copying and re copying was Not so guarded and for one purpose or another .. God allowed some things..
I know for a fact when matching some scripture from the KJV to the Hebrew or Greek that is known ...that ... some verses.. are very awkward.. due to the difference in the grammar of the foreign languages compared to English...
some.. Hebrew or Greek does.. Not translate.. the same
for example Acts 17:22 KJV
"Then Paul stood in the midst of Mars' hill, and said, Ye men of Athens, I perceive that in all things ye are too superstitious."
in the Greek the word used for "superstitious"... was
"deisidaimonesterous"
which actually means "demon dreading"... why did the KJV translators choose the word "superstitious".. instead of simply translation the Greek into the exact English meaning..?
I do Not know... but this is one reason why when one reads the modern translations.. they state..."very religious ".. here...
I still believe "too superstitious ".. is a better meaning than "very religious".. but it's Not exact...
You can't hold to Bible inerrancy and believe that Majority Text Bibles, Minority Text Bibles, and the Septuagint are all inerrant. They have different words included, not included, and changed between those three Bibles. You have to decide which Bible is God's actual word and the Majority Text Bibles such as the KJV as the archeology and lack of contradictions within it to show it's genuine.
Well, then, which KJV is inerrant then? There's been many versions and updates over the KJVs history as well. Saying the bible is inerrant does not mean that a specific translation of the Bible is going to be completely inerrant
Here's a video with no real research. What about the words that have been changed from kjv to modern bibles. Revelation 1:11. Compare that one between them. You'll be surprised. New bibles remove the diety of Jesus saying all things were made through him, not by him. Even the new king james calls itself the crossover bible to get you ready for a newer corrupted version. Romans 3:25 is another one to compare. You need more research before making a video like this.
Yes, lack of meat in arguments, just all theory until u read the text
The King James translation is not the standard we used to judge all others
The original Hebrew and Greek are
This is silly! New translations do not remove any verses. They just do not include verses that were added hundreds, or sometimes even thousands, of years after the original books were written. Modern Christian scholars who do these translations and the scholars that use them aren’t supporting translations that remove verses. The verses were not in the Greek Manuscripts to include. If anyone wants to understand this subject better then they should read James White’s book The King James Only Controversy. It uses factual evidence to dispose of the lies of the King James Only movement. There are also great videos here on RUclips debating KJV Onlyism. Watch the one here on RUclips done by the John Ankerberg Show. It’s got several scholars and editors of the Newer Bible translations and leaders in the KJV Only movement.
Why don't you defend the bible you prefer and not go against the KJV that has more power when you read it, otherwies move on and keep stumbling people in your phere and pay for your actions later.
kjv only
I guess everyone is ok with taken whole verses out & changing words to completely change the meaning of verses in the only real bible KJ. You can call me a kj only all u want & guess what it doesn't bother me a bit because I believe in what the word of God says without any shadow of doubt. As long as u don't, u are gonna keep believing the Devil. Yeah, hath God said.
Matthew 4:4, KJV: "But he answered and said, It is written, Man shall not live by bread alone, but by every word that proceedeth out of the mouth of God.
I'm not a KJV only person. Though I still use it as my primary study bible. Our standing with God should be based on our faith in Jesus Christ not the bible version we subscribed to. I have become concerned with a new movement - The modern translation only movement, which contends that the KJV is flawed. It shouldn't be used anymore. Here is a statement in the RSV preface 1952: The KJV has... been termed "the noblest monument of English prose." Its revisers in 1881 expressed admiration for "its simplicity, its dignity, its power, its happy turns of expression . . . the music of its cadences, and the felicities of its rhythm." It entered, as no other book has, into the making of the personal character and the public institutions of the English-speaking peoples. We owe to it an incalculable debt. YET THE KJV HAS GRAVE DEFECTS < If this isn't double speak I don't know what is. I have read (from the internet) figures of 150, 400 & 450 different English versions of the bible have been produced. If we average those figs. Its 335. Why do we need 335 different translations of the same book? 5, 10, 15 ok, maybe. its an important book. Important books warrant more than 1 translation. But 335? Plain reason and common sense should inform us that theological and economic motives are the primary reasons for this glut of translations. Is God the author of confusion? Its something to think about.
This guy is lost!!! Don't listen to him. The KJV Bible is the exact word of God in English!!! All the other versions are from the Vatican and they all omit scripture at some point. Do your research. Satan knows that the Remnant will feast and devour the Word of God!!! Satan isn't stupid!!! He has to come up a plan for those of us that dedicate ourselves to learning truth and if He can't get us away from the Bible,then,He just creates perversions of the perfect Bible!!! Nasb,Eiv,Nkjv,Etc. Don't be deceived!!! For Example if you look at the NASB Version it says there is now no condemnation to those who are in Christ Jesus.However,it omits the rest of the text. Which says who walk not after the Flesh but after the Spirit!!! Very Important. If you omit that part if the text,then,Christians can think that they can walk in the Flesh and not be condemned!!!
Those are really strong accusations to say Tim is spiritually "lost". I would encourage you to really listen again to what Tim shares. He is sharing as someone who used to lean heavily towards Textus Receptus Onlyist.
@@illbehonest All the other versions omit scripture!!! Research It!! I gave an example with the NASB compared to the KJV Bible!!!
@@illbehonest Or the KJV adds in verses.
@@illbehonest Modern perversions only bring confusion. God is not the author of confusion. The truth is Satan is an enemy of the growth of the Christian in the knowledge of Jesus Christ, and has succeeded in doing so, (which is damnable by the way) by the multiplication of modern perversions based of scraps of scattered manuscripts from a myriad of places (including heretical sects) relegating text criticism, which Ligonier says is necessary to recover the authentic word from corrupt manuscripts, which essentially makes so called Christians dependent on the Scholarly guild to figure out what the authentic word of God is. Talk about a Magisterium! But we see that these modern perversions remove more and more, and criticize more and more of the text making it impossible for a believer to know what they can stand on, which is why there is this phenomenon of "secondary" issues, which basically widdles down the gospel to its most lowest common denominator to cover up the fact that none of these modern perversions, nor the text critics that compile them agree, which of course makes the commandment of Paul to be of one mind impossible! Now if you cannot see that this is the work of Satan, then I would question whether you are actually a believer, or merely a pretender, as Paul tells us there are "false brethren". Remember, that Jesus said man shall live by EVERY Word that proceedeth out of the mouth of God. But consider this, in Amos, there is a prophecy that in the latter days there would be a famine. But Lo! Not a famine of bread, but of the hearing of the Words of God! Only a fool would advocate for these modern perversions, and someone who does not love Christ believes the pack of lies you are telling. There is a place for people like you, and it's called hell, for Jesus warns against those who place a stumbling block before his little ones. Best read Revelation 22, there is a stern warning against tampering with the Word of God. To side with the modern perversions is to throw your lot in with those who corrupt, and pervert the Gospel, and 2 John warns the Christians about that as well. 2 John 2:10 If there come any unto you, and bring not this doctrine, receive him not into your house, neither bid him God speed:
11For he that biddeth him God speed is partaker of his evil deeds.
@@samlawrence2695 So you believe the Word of God was corrupted at some point down the line of history?
Is God the author of confusion?this is a logical question
This man is WEAK!!! If the new modem bibles are better than the KJV why are the churches today such a mess. Answer, they have removed GOD's pure word the KJV bible.
So your saying the KJV only churches don't have any issues? Please tell me where I can find this perfect church, do you go there? Are you perfect? Is the pastor perfect? Are the Elders perfect? I'm not sure I should go I'm not perfect!
@@NLASMINISTRY
we will Never find a perfect church this side of heaven.. and by then we won't need one... since we'll be in God's presence.... BUT I can say over the years... by reading the KJV.. bible over the years.. it has kept me OUT of any messes.. and has even blinded me to messes going on... so in that sense.. I have remained pure and undefiled in church issues
I have never been involved in any disputes at any churches I have been a member of nor privy to any...
though over the years I have heard several tales of church immorality.. theft.. and other sins... but I have found these things out after the issues have been dealt with..
one time a deacon who once discipled me confessed with tears in his eyes.. that he needed to step down from being a deacon.. and he and his family joined another church.. that happened close to 20 years ago... I Never did know what happened..
I thank God for the KJV for keeping me undefiled in any of that,,,.
The churches are a mess largely due to idolatry.
The biggest one imo is the institutional structure (the one King James was in support of btw and one aspect of why we have the KJV to begin with)
The church is the people not the building.
But institutionalism has the church as the building.
The early christians gathered in homes and did not have people lording over them (as Jesus told us not to do).
They were all brothers (and sisters of course).
Jesus was the only head.
Elders/pastors were a plurality. They were as older sheep in the flock, but Jesus was the one and only head.
We are his flock not any man's flock.
Churches were formed first. A group of believers. Then later multiple elders/pastors were made.
Not lording over people.
Everyone participated and not a few.
They were like family gatherings and not 1 day a weel sermons.
Institutionalism (which again KJ supported) crept in.
First with the Chatolic church harlot system, then the Chatolic churches harlot children who adopted the same systems.
The same clergy vs laity system.
It's great
Inerrant Word of God, we have the preserved Word of God.
Okay, in 2023 which translation is CORRECT in English for Exodus 25? Simple question, got an answer?
The preserved word of God is in the original Hebrew, Aramaic, and Greek. Any English translation is just that, a translation. Bad faith "gotcha" questions do nobody any good.
@@reidmason2551 Not bad faith, tell me which translation of Exodus 25 is the most correct? Not asking for perfection, but which is the most correct?
I have a question for you.... Please prove the originals were in Hebrew, Aramaic and Greek? Please give me the documented evidence.....
Thanks :)
is there something in Exodus 25 you are looking at? Please let me know....
@@Kingjamesbible6111 nothing I am looking for. Just tell me which version is the best translation of Exodus 25
Heretical. The KJB is the only true Bible.
So what does that make the English translations that came before it? Or the original language manuscripts? Or Bibles in other languages?
@@reidmason2551
first off many of the bible versions presented before the KJV were Not supported by either the Clergy...Church of England... or the Monarchy...'
thank God.. that He placed King James on the throne... and gave that man a heart that wanted to establish a bible for Common usage throughout all of the churches in England.. that was devoid of most of the Roman Catholic.. influence in it...
many of those pre KJV translations.. were the work by less than a handful of individuals.. working in hiding.. so as Not to be executed..(which many such as Wycliffe were anyway)....and distributed in limited supply... as to Not considered something common..
BUT the KJV bible had at least 47 bible scholars... knowledgeable in Latin Greek.. Hebrew.. as well as many were able to incorporate early manuscripts..... and ALSO... this did NOT have to be done in secret... AND it took several years to accomplish due to those wishing to be so thorough in their endeavors... another thing those such as Tyndale and Wycliffe and Coverdale.. did Not have in their favor...
What is so sad, is this fine Christian man states something he doesn't believe.....
My question to him is, please, please hand me a 'copy' of this perfect, infallible, inerrant and inspired word of God you say you believe in?
Where, in any translation, does it say the 'originals' are perfect and infallible?
It is so sad to hear a person like him.... So sad!
This man doesn't know the issues..... Saved, yes... 'Bible' believer, no......
This man knows perfectly well what's he's talking about. You just don't like what he has to say and want to discredit him for it.
You -- and many others commenting on this video -- are exactly the kind of people he's rebuking. The self-righteous, arrogant people who make bad-faith arguments and look down on anyone who doesn't subscribe to your personal tastes. This is not what any Christian should be doing.
@@reidmason2551 All you have to do is ask him a simple question.... Can you hand me a perfect infallible Bible? And watch the whole thing come undone..... Have a nice day😁
@@Kingjamesbible6111 Can you hand me a perfect infallible Bible? .. Also can you tell me what language it is in? Because there is not one in English.
@@samlawrence2695 Yes I can hand you a copy of this perfect word of God.....
Prove conclusively that the King James Bible is not a perfect infallible verbatim reproduction of the originals..... I am waiting...:)
It is innocent till proved guilty.....
@@Kingjamesbible6111 Which KJV? The 1611 with the apocrypha? The Oxford? The Cambridge? Which differ from each other. Or one of the different revisions which differ from each other. Which one is the "perfect" word of God? Not the KJV where so many words have changed meaning, making the archaic KJV even more inaccurate. The KJV translators knew their work was not perfect. They said that even the meanest translation is still the word of God. . The KJV only cult in their delusions pride and arrogance think they know better. No you cannot show me a "perfect" Bible" just your fantasies. KJV onlyism is another gospel which has no scriptural support. Not one verse supports this heresy which is a man made tradition. Another gospel which KJV onlyism is. According to scripture is the spirit of divination or witchcraft. Sums up the KJV only deception completely. Just an afterthought I do not have to prove anything. Because I am not the one making the ludicrous rediculous claims about the KJV that you are. It is up to you to prove conclusively that the KJV is the "perfect" word of God in English. Also which of the different revisions of the KJV is the "perfect" word of God in English. Please provide chapter and verse from the scripture where God said it. That we would have to wait 1600 years after the insured scripture was completed. To have the so called "perfect" word of God in English I know you can't because there is not one. Exposing all your silly arguments for what they are. Just your delusions.
KJV only. All others are per-versions.
You're disregarding every English translation that predates the KJV, as well as disowning the original language manuscripts, as "perversions." Think about how wrongheaded that sounds.
How are they perversions?
Your making an assumption. But he is certainly referring to all the current modern per-versions. @@reidmason2551
I read my kjv on accordance,for the Greek and Hebrew when i want to chase down a word..