It's too bad that more people don't put as much effort into reading their bible as they do trying to find fault with other translations. For a long time, I wouldn't read the NKJV because of some of these supposed differences. Much like the ones where people claim that the symbol used on the early NKJV were the numbers 666, I don't believe that any of the changes affects the text in any important way. I grew up on the KJV, so reading it is no problem for me, but a lot of people struggle with it. I doubt that God preserved His word so that nobody could understand it, therefore I say read the one that helps you to know what God is saying.
I can understand how some of it is not understandable with some of the outdated words of the old KJV but there's one word in 2 Timothy1:15 that got me wondering why they needed to update the first word Maybe I'm Wrong but it made sense to me and I wonder if you've checked out the difference between (the mark) going (in) vs going (on)
@@kaseycooper7141This is one of Mark Wards "false flag" findings. The word, IN, back in 1600s, meant , ON. Example, I punched him IN the face or I put the wagon IN the meadow. Obviously, my fist didnt go inside his face or the wagon wasnt put into hole, both were put upon the surface.
To bad people arnt trying to follow GODS word instead of disputing the true word of GOD and honoring GODS word just like the true word of GOD says not like the defiled modern counterfeit bibles that defile the word of God and change the meaning of the word its like THE LORD JESUS CHRIST said in these words John 12:48-50 (KJV) He that rejecteth me, and receiveth not my words, hath one that judgeth him: the word that I have spoken, the same shall judge him in the last day. For I have not spoken of myself; but the Father which sent me, he gave me a commandment, what I should say, and what I should speak. And I know that his commandment is life everlasting: whatsoever I speak therefore, even as the Father said unto me, so I speak.John 14:8-26 (KJV) Philip saith unto him, Lord, shew us the Father, and it sufficeth us. Jesus saith unto him, Have I been so long time with you, and yet hast thou not known me, Philip? he that hath seen me hath seen the Father; and how sayest thou then, Shew us the Father? Believest thou not that I am in the Father, and the Father in me? the words that I speak unto you I speak not of myself: but the Father that dwelleth in me, he doeth the works. Believe me that I am in the Father, and the Father in me: or else believe me for the very works' sake. Verily, verily, I say unto you, He that believeth on me, the works that I do shall he do also; and greater works than these shall he do; because I go unto my Father. And whatsoever ye shall ask in my name, that will I do, that the Father may be glorified in the Son. If ye shall ask any thing in my name, I will do it. If ye love me, keep my commandments. And I will pray the Father, and he shall give you another Comforter, that he may abide with you for ever; Even the Spirit of truth; whom the world cannot receive, because it seeth him not, neither knoweth him: but ye know him; for he dwelleth with you, and shall be in you. I will not leave you comfortless: I will come to you. Yet a little while, and the world seeth me no more; but ye see me: because I live, ye shall live also. At that day ye shall know that I am in my Father, and ye in me, and I in you. He that hath my commandments, and keepeth them, he it is that loveth me: and he that loveth me shall be loved of my Father, and I will love him, and will manifest myself to him. Judas saith unto him, not Iscariot, Lord, how is it that thou wilt manifest thyself unto us, and not unto the world? Jesus answered and said unto him, If a man love me, he will keep my words: and my Father will love him, and we will come unto him, and make our abode with him. He that loveth me not keepeth not my sayings: and the word which ye hear is not mine, but the Father's which sent me. These things have I spoken unto you, being yet present with you. But the Comforter, which is the Holy Ghost, whom the Father will send in my name, he shall teach you all things, and bring all things to your remembrance, whatsoever I have said unto you.Galatians 1:7-12 (KJV) Which is not another; but there be some that trouble you, and would pervert the gospel of Christ. But though we, or an angel from heaven, preach any other gospel unto you than that which we have preached unto you, let him be accursed. As we said before, so say I now again, If any man preach any other gospel unto you than that ye have received, let him be accursed. For do I now persuade men, or God? or do I seek to please men? for if I yet pleased men, I should not be the servant of Christ. But I certify you, brethren, that the gospel which was preached of me is not after man. For I neither received it of man, neither was I taught it, but by the revelation of Jesus Christ.((( GOD’S WORD IS A LAW TO BE OBEYED ))) Luke 8:21 kjv And he answered and said unto them, My mother and my brethren are these which hear the word of God, and do it. Luke 11:28 kjv But he said, Yea rather, blessed are they that hear the word of God, and keep it. James 1:22-25 kjv (22) But be ye doers of the word, and not hearers only, deceiving your own selves. (23) For if any be a hearer of the word, and not a doer, he is like unto a man beholding his natural face in a glass: (24) For he beholdeth himself, and goeth his way, and straightway forgetteth what manner of man he was. (25) But whoso looketh into the perfect law of liberty, and continueth therein, he being not a forgetful hearer, but a doer of the work, this man shall be blessed in his deed.
there's an easy way to find out who set alight the bible changes in 1840 the westcott and hort duo ttwo men in the anglican church. they changed the greek koinaniia to a corrupt greek out of alexandria egypt their intention was get rid of the kj bible that hort said he hated. changing Gods preserved inerrant word shows no fear of our heavenly family. both the diety and the blood are frequently removed from new age books calling themselves bibles but are another Jesus. there surely can only be one pure preserved word preserved of God errant in english. it's the majority text the textus receptus
Thank you so very much for this. I have really been struggling with this topic, and you have nailed it closed for me. Your diligence in putting this together to the glory of Christ Jesus is profoundly clarifying and puts my mind and heart at piece. God bless you.
Your attention to detail is remarkable! Language evolution/changes in word meanings must be accounted for. I too use the KJV/NKJV approach, cross-consulting them all the time. As for other modern translations, I use them almost exclusively to compare translations of the Psalms. The TR is my preferred textual basis for the New Testament. Thank you for your hard work in preparing this video! Lord Bless!😊🙏📖
Thank you for making this very important video, I really appreciate it as many others will. I use both the KJV & NKJV in parallel and I think it’s a great combination that will cover everything you need from a translation. The most important thing is that it’s been translated from the correct text.
@@jesusislordoflordsamen hi, I wouldn’t say it’s on par, the KJV is superior in every way however I use the NKJV if there’s a word or passage that I don’t fully understand to see how it has translated it and sometimes it may help. That’s why I said I use both. Out of all the so called ‘modern’ versions it’s the only one worth using. As for the words being omitted, they’ve just been translated differently rather than fully removed, but this doesn’t bother me because the NKJV isn’t the authoritative version for me and use it as a reference. I think it would bother me if it was the only version I was using though.
Good evening Pastor Scott. Thanks for your clarification on KJV and NKJV. I enjoyed your video cast. Unfortunately I cannot meet you in person as I would love it because I am commenting you from Switzerland. I subscribed your RUclips channel. GOD Jehovah bless you richly. Greetings, Norbert Oliver Schneider.
God Blessed You, my brother in Christ!.. This was the most detailed and well researched video I’ve seen in a long time. Thank you for taking the time to put this together AND giving us the scripture references to look things up ourselves. This video will be helpful for many people - empowering them to make informed decisions for themselves!
My congregation has moved toward a 50/50 in its usage of KJV and the NKJV. I have used the KJV from the pulpit and have been using the NKJV more now. I feel I need to use it at times to help people grasp the meaning better. So, I have been referencing both to help us see the original languages better than have been passed down to every generation.
Thank you for making this video, Pastor. I used to believe these claims until I, too, researched it myself. One thing I always struggled with the NKJV was Sheol & Hades. Your answers to these words were very helpful for me. Could you do a more in-depth video on just this subject of Hell/Sheol/Hades? I think it would be very helpful. Blessings to you in Christ
I am glad this was helpful for you. I am considering doing a study on Hell soon, but I have spoken deeper on this subject here as well: “A History of Heavenly Things (John 3:12-16)” ruclips.net/video/_6VXjFLbsKs/видео.html
Thanks for excellent review. Confirms what I searched out years ago when I did switch to NKJV mainly because it was much easier to teach from when teaching in non English countries. Using KJV I was spending a lot of time explaining what KJV was saying.
Ralph, that’s been a struggle for me, being in the Philippines. I’ve tried to read KJV with my wife, but it takes extra explaining. She speaks English, but it’s still a second language. I was concerned about using the NKJV after hearing Riplinger and others demonize it over the years, even though I’m sure my wife would understand it better. Pastor Scott sure helped me out with this video.
I am a KJV guy and as a KJV advocate we must police our own on this one. Gail is a false teacher who simply uses the KJV as the standard rather than the original texts as the standard. I appreciate all the history and literal translation style of the TR that the KJV has given us but we cannot openly lie about another translation just to score points. If you read the strong's concordance you will see that the NKJV renders things accurately and is in my opinion the second greatest translation we have in English. I don't believe anyone honestly reading the NKJV is a wicked reprobate unable to hear the Word of God. The doctrines taught there are all the same in the end. I do have a couple of disagreements on the way NKJV translated things but I also do for the KJV. For instance "quit you like men" can today be interpreted as something very different than what the KJV translators intended to convey. Thank you for being fair to the NKJV on this one. We should always seek to promote truth over scoring points on someone.
What part of this do u not understand Deuteronomy 4:2 (KJV) Ye shall not add unto the word which I command you, neither shall ye diminish ought from it, that ye may keep the commandments of the LORD your God which I command you.Revelation 22:18-19 (KJV) For I testify unto every man that heareth the words of the prophecy of this book, If any man shall add unto these things, God shall add unto him the plagues that are written in this book: And if any man shall take away from the words of the book of this prophecy, God shall take away his part out of the book of life, and out of the holy city, and from the things which are written in this book.Proverbs 30:5-6 (KJV) Every word of God is pure: he is a shield unto them that put their trust in him. Add thou not unto his words, lest he reprove thee, and thou be found a liar.Psalms 12:6-7 (KJV) The words of the LORD are pure words: as silver tried in a furnace of earth, purified seven times. Thou shalt keep them, O LORD, thou shalt preserve them from this generation for ever.Revelation 19:13 (KJV) And he was clothed with a vesture dipped in blood: and his name is called The Word of God.John 1:1 (KJV) In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.
I use the KJV and understand it just fine and that is what I will continue to preach and teach from. We need to explain scripture and rightly divide to ensure truth
@@dylansimmons7164 well u see the word of GOD say u need no man to teach u the holy GHOST will guide u and we sure don't teach them by changing the word of GOD around when the holy GHOST has already inspired it to the maxx if I don't understand somthing I pray about it and the holy GHOST reviles it to me lets leave the Bible writing to the LORD JESUS CHRIST and not man thats what I'm saying nothing more have a blessed day friend
Very good and honest comparison of the arguments. Thank you for presenting both sides of the arguments and providing the evidence to show a clear unbiased outcome. May the LORD bless you and your ministry.
Hey Pastor, I have a somewhat related question to this video. Do you know whether or not Paul did quote from the septuagint? And how frequently? I perfer to trust the Masoretic over the Septuagint, but if Paul used the Septuigant so frequently, then who am I to reject it?
What’s your take on the Titus 3:10 that KJVO use Titus 3:10 NKJV Reject a divisive man after the first and second admonition, Luke 12:51-52 NKJV Do you suppose that I came to give peace on earth? I tell you, not at all, but rather division. [52] For from now on five in one house will be divided: three against two, and two against three. The claim is that Jesus is very divisive and Titus 3:10 should say reject a heretic (KJV) instead. Perhaps you and Dwayne Green could address this one in a video.
You no I want to ask a question. Why every time u join a church they always want you to baptize even doh you have been baptized befor when you tell them they still want you baptized when it’s only one baptism an a pastor of all person should no that.
baptism is the entry into the church. It is a statement that you believe as these people believe. We offer 3 ways to join. By statement of belief, baptism, or by a letter from another Baptist church.
Great video. It's so important to look at both sides of an argument, or to do more research, before these KJV-Only people make judgments like these. That's why it says in Proverbs 18:13 & 17: "He that answers a matter before he hears it, it is shame and folly to him. The first to plead his case seems right, until another comes and examines him." This scripture is not utilised enough, but I pray that more people will do so and this video is going in the right direction, regarding other translations. 👍
Hello Pastor Scott, Thank you, once again, for your diligence. Although I use the KJV, I have never thought that the NKJV was produced to do harm. It is a useful translation, based on the best Greek text, and I have consulted it myself. It is good that you have put this out there. I do sympathise with some of the sentiments of those defending the use of the Received Text, and the KJV translation in particular, but those sentiments must be honest. I think you have clearly pointed out where someone may have been 'technically' correct in saying that words have been 'removed' but deceptive in their presentation with a very dishonest agenda. When a word has been replaced with a more accurate rendering, that is simply not the same as removing it. It may play well to a particular audience but it is still dishonest at its core. Every blessing in your work at Omega Baptist Church. Stephen
Interesting video. However it still leaves me wondering which Bible to opt for. It's horrendously and unnecessarily complicated for someone new to God.
I understand. That’s why I put together this playlist to help: What is the Difference in Bible Translations? ruclips.net/p/PL-dMPDGX0OTGut0jB-MEDj-Qf-bupIG6X
Thank you for taking the time to reply, really grateful. It's starting to look like the NKJV or NIV for me. Will let you know which one I choose. Thanks again and best regards!
As French, i try to follow The Bible Martin, or The Bible Ostervald 1877. They are quite similar to KJV! I will procure to myself, the NKJV, and compare, knowing there is a Lady in France who already traduced the KJV New Testament, Psalms, Proverbs, in French. A lot of work! Thank you for your Channel, and Union of Prayers🙏
Thank you so very much! I feel this is the clarification that many need to see and you have presented it in a wonderful way. I feel that Jesus's main commandment is love. I feel the arguing and fighting among believers over God's word shows satan's power of deceit. Any time we are arguing among each other, I believe we aren't following God's desire for us to love each other. The basis for this arguing makes no sense to me. By following this thinking and arguing over translations created with the intentions and the desire to correctly and clearly share God's word, one could reason that ministers should only read the Bible out loud and not create sermons at all, since they are our interpretations explained using current and past context of the Scripture as given to us by the Holy Spirit, but we know this isn't correct nor is it in God's commandments for us as is evident in Matthew 28:19-20. Another way to look at this is to use modern language, "That is so bad!" And "That is so awesome!" can mean the same thing today depending on the context, now imagine trying to read both of those hundreds or even thousands of years from now. Again, thank you for staying faithful and sharing the Word. Edited for clarification over the arguing.
Good video. I love the KJV for it's beauty, it's place in history and it is what I use to memorize Scripture. But I love the NKJV too. Primarily for it modern English yet KJV-like when speaking with younger people. I also like NASB, NLT and Amplified, ESV occasionally for reference. But that's enough for me. I don't really understand why we have as many modern translations as we do ??? Again, good video. Thanks for taking the time to put it out there. Some of the KJVOs are nuts !
With thousands of TR texts, Byzantine texts and 10s of thousands Majority texts, most with very slight differences, even within catagories, its an interesting thought as to why God chose to preserve His text this way. As whole, we lose nothing. But gain the opportunity to demonstrate unity, compassion and understanding to all our christain family in regards to what bible decisions they make. To exclude all translations but one, rather than learn from them all, and call any family member unsaved, demonically influenced, heretical and such is the opposite of Eph. 4:31,32. Various bible translations are a variety of spices, just like various denominations. God loves variety. Just look at His creation. We can touch more people this way. And that is very good thing.
I discussed these issues in these three videos if you’re interested: What is the Difference in the KJV 1611 and 1769? ruclips.net/video/pIPy6hlYImQ/видео.html Is It Okay to Read A Bible OTHER Than the KJV? ruclips.net/video/DPEfBat8txI/видео.html Why Use the New King James Version? ruclips.net/video/3N3Y22QdvLQ/видео.html
This was my first time hearing about Gail Riplinger. God revealed the differences to me through His words. I had a NIV/KJV parallel Bible and I noticed the difference between the passages and started asking The Lord questions about it in prayer. God gave me the desire to start researching this on my own and I saw it more and more. It built up my confidence in what the scriptures really say and to see what happens to entire doctrines when a word or two gets changed. Then AFTER, I started getting involved in online Christian communities and was seeing these memes. Each time, I cracked open bibles to see it with my own eyes. Things that are different are not the same. The Authorized KJV IS the Word of God.
It is truly amazing how if you are looking for the truth and asking God which is the truth of his word he will reveal his( perfectly purified preserved words) like it tells us in Psalms12:6-7 and things that are different are not the same. you're right you should check out the difference between the mark going (in) vs going (on) and I know most people love to talk about the outdated arcade words of the KJV which there are some that we do not use anymore and are definitely outdated because of our modern language but you should check out 2 Timothy 2:15 it uses the word study in the old KJV but apparently that word is outdated to the ones that make the more modern versions
Thanks for sharing your story. I discussed the differences in the KJV and NIV here: What is the Difference in the KJV and NIV? ruclips.net/video/KC50Ilop9X0/видео.html
Do you think you are somehow more "saved" now or better doing the commands of Yahweh which Jesus told you to keep? How have the "differences" between the two made you "more holy," if you will. That's what nobody can ever explain to me.
@@whoavadis1984 I will try to explain. but I don't know where you got these questions from. The differences between the Bible's to me is about the purity and preservation of the words of God not about being "more holy" because I'm not sure if I'm holy at all and if you are saved you should know that no one is "more saved" than anyone else. There is only saved or lost.
@@kaseycooper7141 then you are confessing that the obsession with the particular translation committee, team, method, etc. is secondary to the message, and that your only source for the decision as to which books even belong, was given to the Catholic Church at the council of Trent in 300 something a.d., and includes the apocrypha. Furthermore you confess that God, for some reason, then allowed His message (or, more specifically, His complete and true and canonical word,) to abide in those Roman hands for over a thousand years until inspiring Luther that the canonized word was actually wrong, and some books were actually not inspired, others were to be relegated to the back as unimportant and "Catholic." Then God waited two hundred years until inspiring a British monarch to translate just those NEW holy canonical words of God into English and then that would be the REAL, real true canonical word of God forever in English. Gotcha. What a weird God! My God Yahweh is omnipotent, omnipresent, omniscient, and omnibenevolent, and can just put His word in our hearts and lead us to truth by His grace and mercy and love for His creation which He called "very good," regardless of the efforts of your human masters to try to put stumbling blocks in front of His Children seeking His Christ, by humans selling the "word of God" for a profit, twisting its simple message to suit their own lusts for power, money, fame, and the other things of this world.
A common theme throughout your video is the idea that the nkjv is more "instantly understood" and therefore "easier" to read.... The NKJV is supposed to be easier to understand than the KJB. So, why does it change: “oak” (Gen. 35:4) to “terebinth trees” “sun was up” (Judg. 8:13) to “Ascent of Heres” “tree” (1 Sam. 22:6) to “tamarish tree” “fatherless” (Lam. 5:3) to “waifs” “princes” (Dan. 6:2) to “satraps” “a penny” (Matt. 20:2) to “a denarius” “deputy” (Acts 18:12) to “proconsul” “thousands” (Acts 21:20) to “myriads” “riot” (Titus 1:6) to “dissipation” “unruly” (Titus 1:6) to “insubordination”
@CC-iu7sq I missed nothing. You missed the point of the comment. KJB is more precise, pastor says nkjv is instantly understood, which is entirely different than being accurate.
@CC-iu7sq Is the word "waifs" more instantly understood more than "fatherless" used in KJB?? You can't have it both ways... the claim is that nkjv is easier because it's more modern language but there are many examples where this is simply not true at all.
@@Holy-Joe7 You literally point out a handful of verses that may have an entire story to explain why they were translated the way they were. I can give you thousands of verses that are instantly more understandable to a lost person and saved person alike. Example: The entire New Testament.
It’s so sad that such small, but important translational changes that were made simply to boost understanding of God’s Word to the modern reader allowed a subsection of Christians to reject said translation. This is sad because God calls us to love our neighbor, not to judge over our neighbor. If one wants to read the KJV only, good on them. This is all well and good. As a reader of both the KJV and the NKJV, we should not let such translational differences undermine the integrity of the word of God. For if we do, how are we any different than the Pharisees and Sadducees who put their own traditions and personal rules over the integrity of the Word of God?
The Creator and Supreme Ruler of the Universe (God)has sent His Word to earth to make mankind to know of the Galactic Battle that rages between the Forces of good and evil. Man is currently under the rule of the evil king. Man has been given a grace period to have opportunity to change their alligence to the Good King. In the Message God gives smaller pictures of the battles as parabolic pictures of the great battle. This message in these times was sent to the King of the English speaking world to be dispatched to all the inhabitants.(Esther 1:22 was a smaller picture of how these type things are done. Attempts to change the King's word are attempts to change the terms of surrender or judgement. Examples are in Ezra.)
Do you use the 1611 edition of the King James? Did the 1769 update hurt this ideal you have about cosmic changes too? I discussed that here: What is the Difference in the KJV 1611 and 1769? ruclips.net/video/pIPy6hlYImQ/видео.html
I have always used the KJV and NKJV in my preaching and Bible studies. I have always said that the KJV is more exact to the traditional text (which doesn’t remove the equivalent of 1 and 2 Peter from the Greek and Hebrew) while the NKJV is more instantly understandable. Both use the same traditional text passed down to every generation. Some English words translated in the KJV have changed meanings but are still exact from the 1769 understanding of those words. There are those who lie about this and this is why I am sharing this truth as every Christian should. We should all be people of the truth. The truth shall set you free is what the Lord said.
Never forget that the translators of the KJV declared it was not their intention to make a new translation but to make a good translation better. Furthermore they declared even the meanest of translations containeth the word of God is indeed the word of God. The NKJV is a great translation and there are several places where there is room for improvement. Genesis 29:39 your dwelling shall be of the fatness of the earth should be rendered your dwelling shall be AWAY from the fatness of the earth 1 Samuel 15: 29 .... will not lie nor relent. For He is not a man, that He should relent should be rendered will not lie nor REPENT ........ that He should REPENT Acts 7:9 And the patriarchs, becoming jealous should be rendered and the patriarchs moved with envy 2 Corinthians 13:5 you are disqualified better rendered you are counterfeit and 2 Corinthians 13:6 not disqualified better rendered not counterfeit Hebrews 2:16 Does not give aid to angels better rendered take on the nature of angels and give aid to the seed of Abraham take on the seed of Abraham So there is room for improvement but the modern translations are still more readable and accurate than the KJV . The KJV does make for a richer reading experience with the thee and thou and thine and ye and giveth and believeth but what applies to the KJV equally applies to the Geneva bible and the ASV and the Tyndale translation and the Great bible
The NKJV is my favorite and go to Bible translation. I also use the NASB and the KJV. I think this KJV only movement is damaging to the body of Christ. Believers are supposed to be of one accord, this movement is being used to divide the church further than denominations have done already. If the church would unite and share the gospel of Jesus Christ with compassion and love we would see the power of God move on a mighty way
There's a big difference between judgemment and condemnation all Christians will at times enter judgement because God loves us such judgments keeps us from condemnation
There are differences between the words and multiple definitions of each word too. In the dictionary it states: Condemnation: noun con·dem·na·tion ˌkän-ˌdem-ˈnā-shən -dəm- Synonyms of condemnation 1 : CENSURE, BLAME … the Quakers, in their uncompromising condemnation of war … -William Ralph Inge 2 : the act of judicially condemning 3 : the state of being condemned … in the hopeless hour of condemnation … -Washington Irving 4 : a reason for condemning His conduct was sufficient condemnation. Judgment: noun judg·ment ˈjəj-mənt variants or judgement Synonyms of judgment 1 a : the process of forming an opinion or evaluation by discerning and comparing careful judgment of the odds b : an opinion or estimate so formed is not worth doing in my judgment 2 a : the capacity for judging : DISCERNMENT be guided by your own judgment showing poor judgment b : the exercise of this capacity a situation requiring careful judgment 3 a : a formal utterance of an authoritative opinion b : an opinion so pronounced 4 a : a formal decision given by a court b (1) : an obligation (such as a debt) created by the decree of a court (2) : a certificate evidencing such a decree 5 a capitalized : the final judging of humankind by God sinners awaiting Judgment b : a divine sentence or decision specifically : a calamity held to be sent by God believed their bad luck to be a judgment upon them 6 : a proposition stating something believed or asserted
I believe the KJV is the preserved word and is perfect without any word changes. Even if you accept those changes you mentioned there are problems that you just cant get around. Not to mention changing words mess up your cross referencing etc. If anybody would keep using the NKJV after hearing these changes then it's on them. 1. 1st Corinthians 1:18 KJV says those of us who are saved while NKJV says "being saved" as if it's a process. Indicates works salvation not instant salvation upon believing the gospel. 2.Acts 3:26 changes Jesus from son to servant. That's enough for me to throw it in the trash. Jesus is God not God's servant. 2 Corinthians 2:17 KJV says corrupting the word of God where NKJV changes it to peddling 4. 2 Timothy 2:15 KJV says "study" ( the only place Paul tells us this) NKJV says be diligent. Big difference. 5. This is a big one. Gen 22:8 KJV say God provide himself the lamb NKJV provide FOR himself the lamb. Huge difference. I could go on and on. By the way Genesis 2:1 should be heaven and earth not heavens. Heavens were created in Gen3. In Matthew narrow is the gate was changed to difficult. There really is no defending it. You have to trust that you have the perfect word of God in your hand.
The KJV has 8 mistrannslations which are very easy to prove. All the verse in the NT which say first day of the week, should say first of the sabbaths. You can go to the Textus Receptus compare acts 20:7 using the original Greek texts used to produce the 1611 and most modern day bibles. It clearly shows it should say first of the sabbaths. Or one of the Sabbaths if you study letvicus 23. You will learn what the counti g of the sabbaths means.
@@davidc2361 - Only eight? I know of many more than eight, but maybe not as easy to show folks who can't read Hebrew or Greek. Aside from that, the greatest abomination is substituting "Yahweh," the Name above all names, almost 8000 times!
@@markrobertsministries That’s objectively false and reiterated talking points given out by the Gipp and Ruckman crowds. There are dozens of verses where words were taken out and words added and rearranged that changed the meaning of said verses. Not the mention the thousands of updated word and grammar changes to be more relevant to 18th century English. You’ve never actually read the 1611 KJV. The 1769 is what you read. And it’s a revision with updated English and grammar.
Excellent video Pastor. I was once in the ranks of the KJVO but after collating translations, it is clearly obvious there is so very little differences and nothing doctrinal in the formal equivalences. From the Textus Receptus(28) to the MajorityText(Byzantine Priority) there is 0.4% difference and from the TR to the CT it is 0.8%. I utilize 5 translations and the interlinear. It all comes down to laziness really. People just believe what they are told and fail to be bereans as commanded by God.
Thanks! I do not trust the modern critical text due to the much omission and have made several videos on the differences. I hope you will have opportunity to check some of them out. God bless!
Matthew 28:1 KJV says Christ rose on God's Sabbath. The Saturday Sabbath, just before the first day of the week started. The NKJV clearly says. After the Sabbath.
28 In the end of the sabbath, as it began to dawn toward the first day of the week, came Mary Magdalene and the other Mary to see the sepulchre. (KJV) 28 Now after the Sabbath, as the first day of the week began to dawn, Mary Magdalene and the other Mary came to see the tomb. (NKJV) The Greek is ὀψέ opse. Both versions are saying the same thing, though the NKJV makes it clearer. One thing to keep in mind is the hours of the sabbath in the Bible (and as currently observed by Jews), ends at nightfall. So, the dawn (which both versions say) is clearly "after the sabbath."
Aside from other errors, almost ALL translations SUBSTITUTE the Name of the Almighty, YAHWEH, almost 8000 times! If that's not a despicable tradition, then I don't know what is, considering the plethora of Scriptures that command and exhort us to "call upon His Name," "sing praise to His Name," glorify His Name," etc. and to substitute it with a title of "the Lord" is at best demeaning to the Almighty Creator, and at worst, blasphemous! By the way, at 2:02 you state that the seventh Command is "thou shalt not bear false witness," when in fact, I think you meant the 9th ;)
Yes, most do not share the name of God consistently. I have been told the ASV does consistently use the word Jehovah to refer God though. Thanks for the catch on the commandment. We all make mistakes sometimes.
@@PastorScottIngram - To me, it's really blasphemous considering all the Texts and I don't know why more believers don't realize this. My biggest problem is when I keep mistyping Scripture references, so yeah, no condemnation there, sir. :)
My only issue with the other versions of the Bible other than the KJV is that God told the readers three separate times not to take away or add to His word. Isn't that exactly what is happening when someone is taking one word out and replacing it with another? Serious question. God bless.
Actually it isn't because translations are not the same as the words written down. The translators are not adding to nor taking away in the KJV or NKJV. Many other modern translation do though because their base text in Hebrew and Greek removes the equivalent of 1 and 2 Peter from the bible. I discuss it deeper here: ruclips.net/video/DPEfBat8txI/видео.html
The NKJV translates the same Hebrew word nāḥam as "repent" in Numbers 23:19 and Job 42:6 etc. Possibly this is a case where we should allow our definitions to be formed by the context of the words rather than to create a doctrine about what a specific word means and then form the Bible to match that doctrine.
To me the use of sir instead of Lord is confusing at best. Maybe even misleading. After listening to your examples of words changed in my mind confirms that the NKJV is inferior to the KJV.
The KJV is more exact to the original words especially if you can understand the 1611 words as they were defined back then. The NKJV is more instantly understandable for today even though it some places it will not be as exact.
There is a difference in a translation being the work of man and a translation being ordained by God. I have never had a problem understanding the KJV.
Translations aren’t inspired. “For the prophecy came not in old time by the will of man: but holy men of God spake as they were moved by the Holy Ghost.” 2 Peter 1:21 holy men did not translate. They spoke.
@@PastorScottIngram I understand the KJV is usually more literal. However, there are some places where the KJV is very not literal. Such as when they use English idioms like God forbid, God save the king, cast the same in his teeth, or fetch a compass. None of which are in the Hebrew or Greek. Mathew 13:39 says the harvest is the end of the world. That word world is not in the Greek. It is age. The NKJV corrects this. The KJV also translates thou shall not murder as thou shall not kill, which is not the best translation. There are two different words in Hebrew, just as in English. One that means an illegal and immoral, killing (murder) and the other that means simply to kill. The word in the commandment is clearly murder not kill. Also check Job 17:6 check the Hebrew and the KJV vs NKJV. Check the Greek in Hebrews 2:16 where once again the NKJV improves. And so on. I firmly believe that the NKJV was a much needed update for readability and accuracy. The KJV has become idolized to the point where people will pick apart every other translation but they will never turn that critical eye towards the KJV. It is just assumed to be perfect and therefore any translation that is different is automatically wrong. The KJV was translated by men just like the NKJV and every other English Bible translation.
@@PastorScottIngram after writing out my first response to your comment I realized which video this comment is on. You yourself in this very video just laid out a whole bunch of places where the NKJV more accurately translates the original Hebrew and Greek. The NKJV removed God because KJV put God where it didn’t belong. The same with all those other words, you just went through.
@@Beefcake1982 I am just pointing out the literalness of using “ye” and “thee” in the KJV. The KJV lacks in instant understanding with its archaic wording which the NKJV does better, but it is considered more exact to the original languages. Both are excellent English translations. I am not putting down either one in either video. Just sharing facts.
@@PastorScottIngram You have made some very good videos on the subject and I do appreciate your honesty. I’m sorry if I come off a bit snappy. I guess I’ve gotten defensive about my beloved NKJV. It’s the Bible that brought me to faith and it seems like every time I turn around somebody wants to tell me that it’s not really the word of God and it’s corrupted. Anyway I think you’re an honest man and I thank you for sharing truth. God bless.
I have used the NKJV for as long as I've been reading the Bible seriously. The first Study Bible I ever bought was a NKJV, in fact. I have found it readable, reliable, and have no problems with it. At this point, though I have multiple translations, I've tended to reach for the NKJV and the NASB (1977 or 1995) the most. I'll pick up the KJV sometimes as well (I have several, with no plans to get rid of them). As for the name of God, I don't much go for Jehovah; I much prefer YHWH or Yahweh, since it's closer to the original. And "LORD" in all caps or big and small caps lets me know we're speaking of God's covenant name. As for Ms. Riplinger, I've heard of her but have no intention of reading her book. If an absolute bombshell drops regarding the NKJV's reliability relative to her claims I may rethink that position; but for now, no.
You should check out your study Bible with one of those old outdated KJV side by side on 2 Timothy 2:15 and ask yourself which one makes more sense then maybe go for the difference between the mark going (in) vs going (on) but maybe I don't know what I'm talking about just check for yourself and pray asking God where is his word perfectly purified and preserved from this generation forever like in Psalms12:6-7
@@kaseycooper7141 Not sure I understand the point. In 2 Tim. 2:15, the only question I might have would be "Study" (KJV) versus "Be diligent" (NKJV, NASB). Did you, perhaps, mean a different verse?
It just seemed odd to me that the first verses I ever read told me to study sounded like something I might have heard before like in school or something I know what study means but if I would have read be diligent instead of study first I probably would not be studying the word of God I have many books that say holy Bible across the front but none of the other has spoken to me in such a powerful way as the one that told me to study when I first opened it up after trying to give it away because I did not want to read it I just wanted to listen to the preacher without reading for myself but maybe it's just me
My understanding is that "be diligent" is a bit closer to the Greek technically, but "be diligent" and "study" are saying the same thing, especially when you consider the rest of 2 Tim. 2:15.
I dont understand how people say they have discernment and they r anointed but they have a counterfeit knock off Bible in there hand the old king James says planly Revelation 22:18-19 (KJV) For I testify unto every man that heareth the words of the prophecy of this book, If any man shall add unto these things, God shall add unto him the plagues that are written in this book: And if any man shall take away from the words of the book of this prophecy, God shall take away his part out of the book of life, and out of the holy city, and from the things which are written in this book.Deuteronomy 4:2 (KJV) Ye shall not add unto the word which I command you, neither shall ye diminish ought from it, that ye may keep the commandments of the LORD your God which I command you.Proverbs 30:5-6 (KJV) Every word of God is pure: he is a shield unto them that put their trust in him. Add thou not unto his words, lest he reprove thee, and thou be found a liar.Revelation 19:13 (KJV) And he was clothed with a vesture dipped in blood: and his name is called The Word of God.and It goes in one ear and out the other the 10 commandments say do not bare false witness well ur bunk bibles are false witness they have been rewrite by people who do not have authority do do so nkjv esv niv all of them r counterfeit every last one old king James is the true word of GOD.
Let's look at the oldest versions that we have and see what they say. 18 Μαρτυρῶ ἐγὼ παντὶ τῷ ἀκούοντι τοὺς λόγους τῆς προφητείας τοῦ βιβλίου τούτου· ἐάν τις ἐπιθῇ ἐπ’ αὐτά, [o]ἐπιθήσει ὁ θεὸς ἐπ’ αὐτὸν τὰς πληγὰς τὰς γεγραμμένας ἐν τῷ βιβλίῳ τούτῳ· 19 καὶ ἐάν τις ἀφέλῃ ἀπὸ τῶν λόγων τοῦ βιβλίου τῆς προφητείας ταύτης, [p]ἀφελεῖ ὁ θεὸς τὸ μέρος αὐτοῦ ἀπὸ τοῦ ξύλου τῆς ζωῆς καὶ ἐκ τῆς πόλεως τῆς ἁγίας, τῶν γεγραμμένων ἐν τῷ βιβλίῳ τούτῳ. Obviously to have a translation a word is substituted for a different word, my question is, does that mean that we all need to learn Greek to truly follow what is written? And if so are all versions not in the original language an abomination? Does God and the Holy Spirit speak to us in the languages of the original Bible?
@@adrenalizd Psalms 12:6-7 (KJV) The words of the LORD are pure words: as silver tried in a furnace of earth, purified seven times. Thou shalt keep them, O LORD, thou shalt preserve them from this generation for ever. This means 7 different languages do u understand this or does it need to be in Greek lol
God bless you all, I love the King James Version too and shall refrain from arguing as it is written, I only ask you brothers and sisters, did the King James Version not come from the original Hebrew,Aramaic and Greek, thus the same verses and commandments there were written? Are the arguments you use to say your version is the only version, the same words in the original language? If so do you really think that God only wanted us to read them as such? Are we not told to go out and teach, and how is it we can teach if the tongue is not known to the listeners? I love you all and may God bless you each one. Edited to add Hebrew and Aramaic to include the Old Testament.
@@adrenalizd the Bible is sacred its not just a book it is HOLY GHOST inspired it is genuine and has no need to be altered or revised or anything at all for that matter and in Hebrew and Greek It say the same thing the old king James 1611 say Deuteronomy 4:2 (KJV) Ye shall not add unto the word which I command you, neither shall ye diminish ought from it, that ye may keep the commandments of the LORD your God which I command you.Revelation 22:18-19 (KJV) For I testify unto every man that heareth the words of the prophecy of this book, If any man shall add unto these things, God shall add unto him the plagues that are written in this book: And if any man shall take away from the words of the book of this prophecy, God shall take away his part out of the book of life, and out of the holy city, and from the things which are written in this book.Proverbs 30:5-6 (KJV) Every word of God is pure: he is a shield unto them that put their trust in him. Add thou not unto his words, lest he reprove thee, and thou be found a liar.Psalms 12:6-7 (KJV) The words of the LORD are pure words: as silver tried in a furnace of earth, purified seven times. Thou shalt keep them, O LORD, thou shalt preserve them from this generation for ever.Revelation 19:13 (KJV) And he was clothed with a vesture dipped in blood: and his name is called The Word of God.John 1:1 (KJV) In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.its about being biblical I love everyone also but principle over personality keep it biblical from the beginning old king James 1611 is just that I yield back lol
What do you do with the mark of the beast as an example where nkjv says on the hand and on the head Whereas the Kjv says “in both times hand and head What about deleting and adding ? Both here scriptures say if you remove I will remove your name from the book of life and adding I will add the plagues of life. Removing the blood of Jesus shows no fear of God.
Regarding conspiracy and superstition; and even marketing: (KJV) Romans 12:1 I beseech you therefore, brethren, by the mercies of God, that ye present your bodies a living sacrifice, holy, acceptable unto God, which is your reasonable service. 2 *And be not conformed to this world:* but be ye transformed by the renewing of your mind, that ye may prove what is that good, and acceptable, and perfect, will of God.
To the NKJV editor who responded to Riplinger: We KJV supporters are NOT stupid ("uninformed" hicks). We are well aware that Riplinger showed in her book the replacement of one English word for another in numerous charts. Tracts are smaller than books, as are their charts. Whether this one tract was not clear, or comprehensive enough, does not negate the accuracy and comprehensiveness of the total work on which the tract is based. It does NOT change the fact that Riplinger is showing the weakening of certain words and sometimes doctrines. The NKJV used some texts other than what the KJV used in its translation. When someone starts referring to the Hebrew or Greek I ask the question: Which Hebrew or Greek? This video just reaffirms my understanding that the NKJV is substantially different from the KJV.
The NKJV used the same texts. The differences did not weaken doctrines, in my opinion, as I have shown here. My point is that we should not use this meme because it's only desire is to deceive and that is not of God. I have been studying Riplinger lately and she didn't have any theological training whatsoever, but she did go to school for advertising and she knows how to get a rise out of people by putting an idea in their heads. Just watch one of her presentations! If one wants to make a point about the accuracy of the KJV, I don't believe she is a good person to get behind. It is better to simply show people the facts of the removal of large portions of scripture in modern translations and then let them decide and I personally believe they will see that the KJV is more exact and the NKJV is simply more instantly understandable to the traditional text as I have said beforehand. Either way, thanks for watching and commenting.
The KJV used texts other than the TR and masoretic as well. Have you not read on what texts were used for the revisions to the KJV and who performed them? It’s okay to update language. The English language changes, brother. Beowulf, which is not understandable in modern English, is written in English. Language changes over time. The NKJV is a terrific translation that God has used and worked though to bring people to him.
God bless you pastor my question concerning the NKJV is that it removes the second person plural pronouns which leads to and accuracy and misinterpretation which makes the NKJV irrelevant? What would be the purpose of having a Bible that that can lead to inaccuracy and misinterpretation?
@terrellking4174 I think the removal of the second person pronouns does make the NKJV less exact, but I don’t think it disqualifies it as a usable translation though because of that fact. There was actually a big discussion when they were making the NKJV about including the second person pronouns but the choice to do it without them was decided.
No worries about you sticking with the KJV. I think that is just fine. I just don't like it when people lie about the NKJV as Gail Riplinger did in her tract.
Just happened on your post here, and I am moved to say a little something. I am nearly 64 years old, and I have intensively studied and taught English for almost 40 of those years. I seem to have a natural ear for what is right and what is wrong in any English text - a love of words, their feeling, their texture...even the "taste" of them on my tongue. I'ts weird, I know, but it is...let me just say it's a talent I have. I've had, as a sinner, much experience with Psalm 51, and especially with v.2: "wash me throughly from my iniquity." I even remember reading an article that discussed why "throughly" was a better word than "thoroughly ." Yet now, when I go there, in my KJV, it's "thoroughly" (although a 100 or so year old KJV bible I own still has "throughly"). But it's this next one that is really "messing with my head." I remember, solid as a rock, learning the Lord's Prayer with "and forgive us our trespasses, as we forgive those that trespass against us. "as WE forgive THOSE, that TRESSPASS against US." My developing young future English teacher mind could never forget the cadence - the rhythm - the rise and fall of the stressed and unstressed syllables - the glorious music of them (my mother used to reminisce about how, when I was around 2-3 years old, I somehow heard the term "corrugated cardboard," and I said nothing but that for two months, so fascinated was I with the sound and feel of those words). But now, I find, even in the 100-year-old KJV, "Forgive us our debts, as we forgive our debtors." It's heavy. It's clunky. No rhythm or music at all. I can explain easily about how you are wrong about any other so-called "Mandela Effect," but not this one. It seriously disturbs me. Thanks for listening.
@@nerowolfe929 Could you please expand on this? Additionally, one would expect that someone who teaches English would present their thoughts in a more structured manner. Instead, it reads like a wall of text commonly found on social media, created by someone who does not care to construct their words in a way that is correct and visually appealing. This struck me as odd, as I would have anticipated something different. Something like this, maybe? I recently came across your post, and I felt compelled to share my thoughts. I am nearly 64 years old and have spent almost 40 years intensively studying and teaching English. I seem to possess a natural ear for discerning what is right and wrong in any English text. My love for words encompasses their feeling, texture, and even the "taste" of them on my tongue. It might sound peculiar, but it's a talent I have. As someone who has had considerable experience with Psalm 51, particularly with verse 2 that states, “wash me throughly from my iniquity,” I recall reading an article discussing why “throughly” is a superior word compared to “thoroughly.” Interestingly, when I read this passage in my King James Version (KJV), it presents “thoroughly.” However, I possess an old KJV Bible, over 100 years old, that still uses “throughly.” What truly perplexes me is the Lord’s Prayer. I distinctly remember learning it with the phrase “and forgive us our trespasses, as we forgive those that trespass against us.” I can still hear the cadence and rhythm in my mind-the rise and fall of stressed and unstressed syllables, creating a beautiful musicality. My mother often reminisces about how, at around 2-3 years old, I was captivated by the term “corrugated cardboard” and repeated it for two months, enchanted by the sound and feel of those words. Now, however, I find that even in my 100-year-old KJV, the prayer states, “Forgive us our debts, as we forgive our debtors.” This version feels heavy and clunky, lacking the rhythm and music I once cherished. While I can easily explain why you might be mistaken about other so-called “Mandela Effects,” this particular change genuinely disturbs me.
@@nerowolfe929 You are talking about Matthew 6:12, you just have the versions mixed up is all. "And forgive us our trespasses, as we forgive them that trespass against us." New Matthew Bible (NMB) "And forgive us our debts, As we forgive our debtors." New King James Version (NKJV) "And forgive us our debts, as we forgive our debtors." King James Version (KJV)
@Helix_22 I'm sorry, but you missed the point about my age. I was brought up in a conservative Southern Baptist church in Roanoke, Virginia in the 1960s. EVERYBODY used the King James Version. I learned the Lord's Prayer from the KJV in Sunday school. "Tresspasses" was a word precisely fitted to my youthful aesthetic. I could not have gotten it wrong.
Thank you for your response. I would have liked to have heard more on Riplingers perspective. This seemed one sided. Also, transliterations are not more understandable. Certainly, Jehovahs Witnesses like hades and Gehenna.
I agree there are issues in group reading, but I wouldn’t suggest everyone read the NIV which removes verses in order to make it simpler. At least the NKJV does not remove verses. Anyone that says differently is lying.
Is the NKJV an improvement of the KJV? The following is from Sam Gipp's The Answer Book. QUESTION: The New King James Version is based on the Antiochian manuscripts. Is it an improvement over the King James Bible? ANSWER: No. EXPLANATION: The New King James Version is to the English Bible what the Alexandrian manuscripts are to GreekÄa corruption of a pure text by men who hold the deplorable doctrine that the Bible cannot be perfect (regardless of what they may say when they preach) and must be corrected by the feeble intellect of man. The New King James Version, unlike most modern translations, is based on the correct Antiochian manuscripts instead of the corrupt Alexandrian manuscripts. Unfortunately, the men doing the translation work view the Bible as imperfect. They would vehemently deny this charge in public because their jobs depend on it, but in FACT they do not believe that ANY Bible is perfect. Not even their own New King James Version! Thus, to them, the Bible is lost ("settled" in heaven) and the minds of scholars are the only hope of rescuing its "thoughts" from oblivion. Many of the men on the board of translators may indeed be great preachers and pastors, but that by no means entitles them to correct the Bible. Sincerity cannot improve on perfection. Thus, instead of "making a good thing better" they have only managed, for all of their trouble, to make a "perfect thing tainted". It must be remembered, there is a great deal of prestige in sitting on the board of translators of a "modern" version of the Bible (Matthew 23:5-7).
The fact still remains, nothing is to be added or omitted. I believe changing is the same as adding and/or omitting. I'm KJV all the way. If any word is difficult to understand it can be found in the Webster's Dictionary 1828 edition...on-line.
In these videos, I am a shepherd just trying protecting the Lord’s flock from the wolves. Truth is always what God desires to be presented. Please make plans to view a video on this channel that will go LIVE on January 24, 2025 called “Is the New King James Version a Gateway Bible to Modern Translations?”
Well well well Here are the people Jesus said Many will come in my name and say here he is there he is Now we see Lord all these people who claim to be in you and yes Lord you are right, there are indeed many. 1000 + new corrupt books saying these Bibles are not Gods (Jesus) preserved word.
“Hell” is technically okay, as long as one realizes it just means “hole” or “place where something is hidden or unseen,” and has no inherent meaning of “inescapable torture chamber” as most now mistakenly assume it means.
@@DrewCostenwell thats what jesus said it was many times and thats what everyone else said it was. you cant read the word hell to mean "hole" to prove there isnt an afterlife. what? do we not go to heaven either? and im not saying this from a kjv only perspective or anything.
@@swamprat22 I didn’t say anything about an afterlife. That said, I don’t believe in one, no. Only a resurrection. Too big a topic for a RUclips comment, but search for “What the Bible really says about heaven, hell, judgement, death, sin, and salvation” on the True Biblical Freedom page with my name and you’ll find a detailed explanation, using only the KJV.
1 John 3:7-8 (KJV 1900): let no man deceive you: he that doeth righteousness is righteous, even as he is righteous. 8 He that committeth sin is of the devil; for the devil sinneth from the beginning. Simple.
It's too bad that more people don't put as much effort into reading their bible as they do trying to find fault with other translations. For a long time, I wouldn't read the NKJV because of some of these supposed differences. Much like the ones where people claim that the symbol used on the early NKJV were the numbers 666, I don't believe that any of the changes affects the text in any important way. I grew up on the KJV, so reading it is no problem for me, but a lot of people struggle with it. I doubt that God preserved His word so that nobody could understand it, therefore I say read the one that helps you to know what God is saying.
I can understand how some of it is not understandable with some of the outdated words of the old KJV but there's one word in 2 Timothy1:15 that got me wondering why they needed to update the first word Maybe I'm Wrong but it made sense to me and I wonder if you've checked out the difference between (the mark) going (in) vs going (on)
@@kaseycooper7141This is one of Mark Wards "false flag" findings. The word, IN, back in 1600s, meant , ON. Example, I punched him IN the face or I put the wagon IN the meadow. Obviously, my fist didnt go inside his face or the wagon wasnt put into hole, both were put upon the surface.
To bad people arnt trying to follow GODS word instead of disputing the true word of GOD and honoring GODS word just like the true word of GOD says not like the defiled modern counterfeit bibles that defile the word of God and change the meaning of the word its like THE LORD JESUS CHRIST said in these words John 12:48-50 (KJV) He that rejecteth me, and receiveth not my words, hath one that judgeth him: the word that I have spoken, the same shall judge him in the last day.
For I have not spoken of myself; but the Father which sent me, he gave me a commandment, what I should say, and what I should speak.
And I know that his commandment is life everlasting: whatsoever I speak therefore, even as the Father said unto me, so I speak.John 14:8-26 (KJV) Philip saith unto him, Lord, shew us the Father, and it sufficeth us.
Jesus saith unto him, Have I been so long time with you, and yet hast thou not known me, Philip? he that hath seen me hath seen the Father; and how sayest thou then, Shew us the Father?
Believest thou not that I am in the Father, and the Father in me? the words that I speak unto you I speak not of myself: but the Father that dwelleth in me, he doeth the works.
Believe me that I am in the Father, and the Father in me: or else believe me for the very works' sake.
Verily, verily, I say unto you, He that believeth on me, the works that I do shall he do also; and greater works than these shall he do; because I go unto my Father.
And whatsoever ye shall ask in my name, that will I do, that the Father may be glorified in the Son.
If ye shall ask any thing in my name, I will do it.
If ye love me, keep my commandments.
And I will pray the Father, and he shall give you another Comforter, that he may abide with you for ever;
Even the Spirit of truth; whom the world cannot receive, because it seeth him not, neither knoweth him: but ye know him; for he dwelleth with you, and shall be in you.
I will not leave you comfortless: I will come to you.
Yet a little while, and the world seeth me no more; but ye see me: because I live, ye shall live also.
At that day ye shall know that I am in my Father, and ye in me, and I in you.
He that hath my commandments, and keepeth them, he it is that loveth me: and he that loveth me shall be loved of my Father, and I will love him, and will manifest myself to him.
Judas saith unto him, not Iscariot, Lord, how is it that thou wilt manifest thyself unto us, and not unto the world?
Jesus answered and said unto him, If a man love me, he will keep my words: and my Father will love him, and we will come unto him, and make our abode with him.
He that loveth me not keepeth not my sayings: and the word which ye hear is not mine, but the Father's which sent me.
These things have I spoken unto you, being yet present with you.
But the Comforter, which is the Holy Ghost, whom the Father will send in my name, he shall teach you all things, and bring all things to your remembrance, whatsoever I have said unto you.Galatians 1:7-12 (KJV) Which is not another; but there be some that trouble you, and would pervert the gospel of Christ.
But though we, or an angel from heaven, preach any other gospel unto you than that which we have preached unto you, let him be accursed.
As we said before, so say I now again, If any man preach any other gospel unto you than that ye have received, let him be accursed.
For do I now persuade men, or God? or do I seek to please men? for if I yet pleased men, I should not be the servant of Christ.
But I certify you, brethren, that the gospel which was preached of me is not after man.
For I neither received it of man, neither was I taught it, but by the revelation of Jesus Christ.((( GOD’S WORD IS A LAW TO BE OBEYED )))
Luke 8:21 kjv
And he answered and said unto them, My mother and my brethren are these which hear the word of God, and do it.
Luke 11:28 kjv
But he said, Yea rather, blessed are they that hear the word of God, and keep it.
James 1:22-25 kjv
(22) But be ye doers of the word, and not hearers only, deceiving your own selves.
(23) For if any be a hearer of the word, and not a doer, he is like unto a man beholding his natural face in a glass:
(24) For he beholdeth himself, and goeth his way, and straightway forgetteth what manner of man he was.
(25) But whoso looketh into the perfect law of liberty, and continueth therein, he being not a forgetful hearer, but a doer of the work, this man shall be blessed in his deed.
Thats how I found out they were currrtp by reading them evidently somthing u have not done that u really should if u honor GODS WORD
there's an easy way to find out who set alight the bible changes in 1840
the westcott and hort duo ttwo men in the anglican church.
they changed the greek koinaniia to a corrupt greek out of alexandria egypt
their intention was get rid of the kj bible that hort said he hated.
changing Gods preserved inerrant word shows no fear of our heavenly family.
both the diety and the blood are frequently removed from new age books calling themselves bibles but are another Jesus.
there surely can only be one pure preserved word preserved of God errant in english.
it's the majority text the textus receptus
Thank you so very much for this. I have really been struggling with this topic, and you have nailed it closed for me. Your diligence in putting this together to the glory of Christ Jesus is profoundly clarifying and puts my mind and heart at piece. God bless you.
I am very glad this was a blessing and a help for you!
Your attention to detail is remarkable! Language evolution/changes in word meanings must be accounted for. I too use the KJV/NKJV approach, cross-consulting them all the time. As for other modern translations, I use them almost exclusively to compare translations of the Psalms. The TR is my preferred textual basis for the New Testament. Thank you for your hard work in preparing this video! Lord Bless!😊🙏📖
Thanks for your kind words! I am glad this was a help for you.
Thank you for making this very important video, I really appreciate it as many others will. I use both the KJV & NKJV in parallel and I think it’s a great combination that will cover everything you need from a translation. The most important thing is that it’s been translated from the correct text.
So what do you say? Is NKJV on par with KJV? Did it really omit all these words?
@jesusislord-ce1or did you even watch the video?
There is nothing beneficial about a new age Bible version ushering many into the eventual religion of Anti-Christ.
@@jesusislordoflordsamen hi, I wouldn’t say it’s on par, the KJV is superior in every way however I use the NKJV if there’s a word or passage that I don’t fully understand to see how it has translated it and sometimes it may help. That’s why I said I use both. Out of all the so called ‘modern’ versions it’s the only one worth using. As for the words being omitted, they’ve just been translated differently rather than fully removed, but this doesn’t bother me because the NKJV isn’t the authoritative version for me and use it as a reference. I think it would bother me if it was the only version I was using though.
Thanks and Amen brother!
What an excellent eye opening video Pastor Ingram God Bless you brother, subscribed.
I’m glad this was a blessing! Thanks for subscribing!
Good evening Pastor Scott. Thanks for your clarification on KJV and NKJV. I enjoyed your video cast. Unfortunately I cannot meet you in person as I would love it because I am commenting you from Switzerland. I subscribed your RUclips channel. GOD Jehovah bless you richly. Greetings, Norbert Oliver Schneider.
Thanks so much for subscribing and your kind words! I’m glad this was a blessing and a help to you!
Argh love your work brother. Thankyou.
Thanks! I am glad it was a blessing!
I read from both the KJV and the 1599 Geneva Bible. What is your take on the Geneva Bible?
I really like the Geneva Bible. I prefer Geneva and KJV and NKJV.
It's from the devil because it says the spirit "came down" instead of "descended!" - some kjvo sheep, probably.
Geneva says man if he hate wive,put her away and some other stuff. Check Will Kenny and Gene Kim.
It’s gas extra books not agreed on
God Blessed You, my brother in Christ!.. This was the most detailed and well researched video I’ve seen in a long time. Thank you for taking the time to put this together AND giving us the scripture references to look things up ourselves. This video will be helpful for many people - empowering them to make informed decisions for themselves!
I’m glad this was a blessing. I feel a burden to get truth to God’s people on this topic.
This was a thoughtful analysis of objections to the NKJV. I followed along with my KJV and NKJV. NKJV is my daily driver.
Thanks! I am glad it was a blessing!
10:13 why would they do this hot is god save the king hard to understand
Because it is a term not in common usage today that could be misleading or misunderstood.
Very helpful. Great content
Thanks! I’m glad it was a blessing!
The question is pastor will you and your congregation be continuing to use the kjv?👍
My congregation has moved toward a 50/50 in its usage of KJV and the NKJV. I have used the KJV from the pulpit and have been using the NKJV more now. I feel I need to use it at times to help people grasp the meaning better. So, I have been referencing both to help us see the original languages better than have been passed down to every generation.
Thank you for making this video, Pastor. I used to believe these claims until I, too, researched it myself.
One thing I always struggled with the NKJV was Sheol & Hades. Your answers to these words were very helpful for me.
Could you do a more in-depth video on just this subject of Hell/Sheol/Hades? I think it would be very helpful.
Blessings to you in Christ
I am glad this was helpful for you. I am considering doing a study on Hell soon, but I have spoken deeper on this subject here as well:
“A History of Heavenly Things (John 3:12-16)”
ruclips.net/video/_6VXjFLbsKs/видео.html
@@PastorScottIngram Thank you for the link. I will check it out.
Thanks for excellent review. Confirms what I searched out years ago when I did switch to NKJV mainly because it was much easier to teach from when teaching in non English countries. Using KJV I was spending a lot of time explaining what KJV was saying.
I’m glad it was a blessing! The NKJV has been attacked almost as much as the KJV if not more. We need the truth to get out there.
Ralph, that’s been a struggle for me, being in the Philippines. I’ve tried to read KJV with my wife, but it takes extra explaining. She speaks English, but it’s still a second language. I was concerned about using the NKJV after hearing Riplinger and others demonize it over the years, even though I’m sure my wife would understand it better. Pastor Scott sure helped me out with this video.
I am a KJV guy and as a KJV advocate we must police our own on this one. Gail is a false teacher who simply uses the KJV as the standard rather than the original texts as the standard. I appreciate all the history and literal translation style of the TR that the KJV has given us but we cannot openly lie about another translation just to score points. If you read the strong's concordance you will see that the NKJV renders things accurately and is in my opinion the second greatest translation we have in English. I don't believe anyone honestly reading the NKJV is a wicked reprobate unable to hear the Word of God. The doctrines taught there are all the same in the end. I do have a couple of disagreements on the way NKJV translated things but I also do for the KJV. For instance "quit you like men" can today be interpreted as something very different than what the KJV translators intended to convey. Thank you for being fair to the NKJV on this one. We should always seek to promote truth over scoring points on someone.
What part of this do u not understand Deuteronomy 4:2 (KJV) Ye shall not add unto the word which I command you, neither shall ye diminish ought from it, that ye may keep the commandments of the LORD your God which I command you.Revelation 22:18-19 (KJV) For I testify unto every man that heareth the words of the prophecy of this book, If any man shall add unto these things, God shall add unto him the plagues that are written in this book:
And if any man shall take away from the words of the book of this prophecy, God shall take away his part out of the book of life, and out of the holy city, and from the things which are written in this book.Proverbs 30:5-6 (KJV) Every word of God is pure: he is a shield unto them that put their trust in him.
Add thou not unto his words, lest he reprove thee, and thou be found a liar.Psalms 12:6-7 (KJV) The words of the LORD are pure words: as silver tried in a furnace of earth, purified seven times.
Thou shalt keep them, O LORD, thou shalt preserve them from this generation for ever.Revelation 19:13 (KJV) And he was clothed with a vesture dipped in blood: and his name is called The Word of God.John 1:1 (KJV) In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.
I use the KJV and understand it just fine and that is what I will continue to preach and teach from. We need to explain scripture and rightly divide to ensure truth
I understand every bit of it. God has surely preserved his words in the TR. No debate here. @@rogerferrell861
@@dylansimmons7164 well u see the word of GOD say u need no man to teach u the holy GHOST will guide u and we sure don't teach them by changing the word of GOD around when the holy GHOST has already inspired it to the maxx if I don't understand somthing I pray about it and the holy GHOST reviles it to me lets leave the Bible writing to the LORD JESUS CHRIST and not man thats what I'm saying nothing more have a blessed day friend
@@dylansimmons7164 me too. I recommend the KJV firmly. But I don’t think we should make up lies about other translations to justify our position.
That was very well done ,God Bless you Pastor
Thanks! I’m glad it was helpful
Very good and honest comparison of the arguments. Thank you for presenting both sides of the arguments and providing the evidence to show a clear unbiased outcome. May the LORD bless you and your ministry.
Thanks for your kind words!
Some of these ("God save the king!") are Anglicisms, using what was in vogue in England at the time of the KJV project.
true
Hey Pastor, I have a somewhat related question to this video. Do you know whether or not Paul did quote from the septuagint? And how frequently?
I perfer to trust the Masoretic over the Septuagint, but if Paul used the Septuigant so frequently, then who am I to reject it?
Masoretes deliberately made changes against Christianity. Why would you trust the enemies of Christ lol?
I finally got around to discussing the Septuagint here: ruclips.net/video/ks8CtgnsOts/видео.html
What’s your take on the Titus 3:10 that KJVO use
Titus 3:10 NKJV
Reject a divisive man after the first and second admonition,
Luke 12:51-52 NKJV
Do you suppose that I came to give peace on earth? I tell you, not at all, but rather division. [52] For from now on five in one house will be divided: three against two, and two against three.
The claim is that Jesus is very divisive and Titus 3:10 should say reject a heretic (KJV) instead.
Perhaps you and Dwayne Green could address this one in a video.
I have now answered this question here if you're interested: ruclips.net/video/kXaOQsb2lMo/видео.html
You no I want to ask a question. Why every time u join a church they always want you to baptize even doh you have been baptized befor when you tell them they still want you baptized when it’s only one baptism an a pastor of all person should no that.
baptism is the entry into the church. It is a statement that you believe as these people believe. We offer 3 ways to join. By statement of belief, baptism, or by a letter from another Baptist church.
.
THIS IS SURREAL
How, just how can her conscience carry this?
Amazing, isn’t it? Yet she still reports this stuff today and even profits off it.
Well research presentation
Thanks!
Great video. It's so important to look at both sides of an argument, or to do more research, before these KJV-Only people make judgments like these. That's why it says in Proverbs 18:13 & 17:
"He that answers a matter before he hears it, it is shame and folly to him. The first to plead his case seems right, until another comes and examines him."
This scripture is not utilised enough, but I pray that more people will do so and this video is going in the right direction, regarding other translations. 👍
Thanks for your kind words! I appreciate them
Hello Pastor Scott,
Thank you, once again, for your diligence. Although I use the KJV, I have never thought that the NKJV was produced to do harm. It is a useful translation, based on the best Greek text, and I have consulted it myself.
It is good that you have put this out there. I do sympathise with some of the sentiments of those defending the use of the Received Text, and the KJV translation in particular, but those sentiments must be honest. I think you have clearly pointed out where someone may have been 'technically' correct in saying that words have been 'removed' but deceptive in their presentation with a very dishonest agenda. When a word has been replaced with a more accurate rendering, that is simply not the same as removing it. It may play well to a particular audience but it is still dishonest at its core.
Every blessing in your work at Omega Baptist Church.
Stephen
Thanks! God bless you my friend!
Interesting video. However it still leaves me wondering which Bible to opt for. It's horrendously and unnecessarily complicated for someone new to God.
I understand. That’s why I put together this playlist to help:
What is the Difference in Bible Translations?
ruclips.net/p/PL-dMPDGX0OTGut0jB-MEDj-Qf-bupIG6X
Thank you for taking the time to reply, really grateful. It's starting to look like the NKJV or NIV for me. Will let you know which one I choose. Thanks again and best regards!
Thank for your teaching brother really helped me understand the difference between the KJV and the nkjv they're both really good translations
Thanks for your kind words and encouragement!
Thank you sir, for taking the wind out of the sails of the party-spirit KJV Only movement.
You’re welcome!
As French, i try to follow The Bible Martin, or The Bible Ostervald 1877. They are quite similar to KJV!
I will procure to myself, the NKJV, and compare, knowing there is a Lady in France who already traduced the KJV New Testament, Psalms, Proverbs, in French.
A lot of work! Thank you for your Channel, and Union of Prayers🙏
Thanks for watching and sharing! It is good to know about the French version of the traditional text!
Thank you so very much! I feel this is the clarification that many need to see and you have presented it in a wonderful way. I feel that Jesus's main commandment is love. I feel the arguing and fighting among believers over God's word shows satan's power of deceit. Any time we are arguing among each other, I believe we aren't following God's desire for us to love each other. The basis for this arguing makes no sense to me.
By following this thinking and arguing over translations created with the intentions and the desire to correctly and clearly share God's word, one could reason that ministers should only read the Bible out loud and not create sermons at all, since they are our interpretations explained using current and past context of the Scripture as given to us by the Holy Spirit, but we know this isn't correct nor is it in God's commandments for us as is evident in Matthew 28:19-20. Another way to look at this is to use modern language, "That is so bad!" And "That is so awesome!" can mean the same thing today depending on the context, now imagine trying to read both of those hundreds or even thousands of years from now.
Again, thank you for staying faithful and sharing the Word.
Edited for clarification over the arguing.
Thanks for your kind words!
Good video. I love the KJV for it's beauty, it's place in history and it is what I use to memorize Scripture. But I love the NKJV too. Primarily for it modern English yet KJV-like when speaking with younger people. I also like NASB, NLT and Amplified, ESV occasionally for reference. But that's enough for me. I don't really understand why we have as many modern translations as we do ??? Again, good video. Thanks for taking the time to put it out there. Some of the KJVOs are nuts !
The reason we have so many modern Bibles is money, plain and simple.
Thanks! I’m glad it was a blessing
With thousands of TR texts, Byzantine texts and 10s of thousands Majority texts, most with very slight differences, even within catagories, its an interesting thought as to why God chose to preserve His text this way. As whole, we lose nothing. But gain the opportunity to demonstrate unity, compassion and understanding to all our christain family in regards to what bible decisions they make. To exclude all translations but one, rather than learn from them all, and call any family member unsaved, demonically influenced, heretical and such is the opposite of Eph. 4:31,32. Various bible translations are a variety of spices, just like various denominations. God loves variety. Just look at His creation. We can touch more people this way. And that is very good thing.
I discussed these issues in these three videos if you’re interested:
What is the Difference in the KJV 1611 and 1769?
ruclips.net/video/pIPy6hlYImQ/видео.html
Is It Okay to Read A Bible OTHER Than the KJV?
ruclips.net/video/DPEfBat8txI/видео.html
Why Use the New King James Version?
ruclips.net/video/3N3Y22QdvLQ/видео.html
This was my first time hearing about Gail Riplinger. God revealed the differences to me through His words. I had a NIV/KJV parallel Bible and I noticed the difference between the passages and started asking The Lord questions about it in prayer. God gave me the desire to start researching this on my own and I saw it more and more. It built up my confidence in what the scriptures really say and to see what happens to entire doctrines when a word or two gets changed. Then AFTER, I started getting involved in online Christian communities and was seeing these memes. Each time, I cracked open bibles to see it with my own eyes.
Things that are different are not the same.
The Authorized KJV IS the Word of God.
It is truly amazing how if you are looking for the truth and asking God which is the truth of his word he will reveal his( perfectly purified preserved words) like it tells us in Psalms12:6-7 and things that are different are not the same. you're right you should check out the difference between the mark going (in) vs going (on) and I know most people love to talk about the outdated arcade words of the KJV which there are some that we do not use anymore and are definitely outdated because of our modern language but you should check out 2 Timothy 2:15 it uses the word study in the old KJV but apparently that word is outdated to the ones that make the more modern versions
Thanks for sharing your story. I discussed the differences in the KJV and NIV here:
What is the Difference in the KJV and NIV?
ruclips.net/video/KC50Ilop9X0/видео.html
Do you think you are somehow more "saved" now or better doing the commands of Yahweh which Jesus told you to keep? How have the "differences" between the two made you "more holy," if you will. That's what nobody can ever explain to me.
@@whoavadis1984 I will try to explain. but I don't know where you got these questions from. The differences between the Bible's to me is about the purity and preservation of the words of God not about being "more holy" because I'm not sure if I'm holy at all and if you are saved you should know that no one is "more saved" than anyone else. There is only saved or lost.
@@kaseycooper7141 then you are confessing that the obsession with the particular translation committee, team, method, etc. is secondary to the message, and that your only source for the decision as to which books even belong, was given to the Catholic Church at the council of Trent in 300 something a.d., and includes the apocrypha. Furthermore you confess that God, for some reason, then allowed His message (or, more specifically, His complete and true and canonical word,) to abide in those Roman hands for over a thousand years until inspiring Luther that the canonized word was actually wrong, and some books were actually not inspired, others were to be relegated to the back as unimportant and "Catholic." Then God waited two hundred years until inspiring a British monarch to translate just those NEW holy canonical words of God into English and then that would be the REAL, real true canonical word of God forever in English. Gotcha. What a weird God!
My God Yahweh is omnipotent, omnipresent, omniscient, and omnibenevolent, and can just put His word in our hearts and lead us to truth by His grace and mercy and love for His creation which He called "very good," regardless of the efforts of your human masters to try to put stumbling blocks in front of His Children seeking His Christ, by humans selling the "word of God" for a profit, twisting its simple message to suit their own lusts for power, money, fame, and the other things of this world.
A common theme throughout your video is the idea that the nkjv is more "instantly understood" and therefore "easier" to read....
The NKJV is supposed to be easier to understand than the KJB. So, why does it change:
“oak” (Gen. 35:4) to “terebinth trees”
“sun was up” (Judg. 8:13) to “Ascent of Heres”
“tree” (1 Sam. 22:6) to “tamarish tree”
“fatherless” (Lam. 5:3) to “waifs”
“princes” (Dan. 6:2) to “satraps”
“a penny” (Matt. 20:2) to “a denarius”
“deputy” (Acts 18:12) to “proconsul”
“thousands” (Acts 21:20) to “myriads”
“riot” (Titus 1:6) to “dissipation”
“unruly” (Titus 1:6) to “insubordination”
Simple. Accuracy of translation in our modern tongue. You missed literally half of the video.
@CC-iu7sq I missed nothing. You missed the point of the comment. KJB is more precise, pastor says nkjv is instantly understood, which is entirely different than being accurate.
@CC-iu7sq
Is the word "waifs" more instantly understood more than "fatherless" used in KJB??
You can't have it both ways... the claim is that nkjv is easier because it's more modern language but there are many examples where this is simply not true at all.
@@Holy-Joe7 You literally point out a handful of verses that may have an entire story to explain why they were translated the way they were. I can give you thousands of verses that are instantly more understandable to a lost person and saved person alike.
Example: The entire New Testament.
@@CC-iu7sq
Oh, ok. 👏
Thank you.
I’m glad it was a blessing and a help!
It’s so sad that such small, but important translational changes that were made simply to boost understanding of God’s Word to the modern reader allowed a subsection of Christians to reject said translation. This is sad because God calls us to love our neighbor, not to judge over our neighbor. If one wants to read the KJV only, good on them. This is all well and good. As a reader of both the KJV and the NKJV, we should not let such translational differences undermine the integrity of the word of God. For if we do, how are we any different than the Pharisees and Sadducees who put their own traditions and personal rules over the integrity of the Word of God?
We are warned of the wiles of the devil. He certainly wants to make it hard to understand the whole Word preserved to every generation.
The Creator and Supreme Ruler of the Universe (God)has sent His Word to earth to make mankind to know of the Galactic Battle that rages between the Forces of good and evil.
Man is currently under the rule of the evil king. Man has been given a grace period to have opportunity to change their alligence to the Good King. In the Message God gives smaller pictures of the
battles as parabolic pictures of the great battle.
This message in these times was sent to the King of the English speaking world to be dispatched to all the inhabitants.(Esther 1:22 was a smaller picture of how these type things are done.
Attempts to change the King's word are attempts to change the terms of surrender or judgement.
Examples are in Ezra.)
Do you use the 1611 edition of the King James? Did the 1769 update hurt this ideal you have about cosmic changes too?
I discussed that here:
What is the Difference in the KJV 1611 and 1769?
ruclips.net/video/pIPy6hlYImQ/видео.html
I appreciate this but it got too long and drawn out for my attention span. maybe I'll listen to the rest another time.
This was a rather short presentation compared with some other resources on this topic.... take your add meds and relax focus...
I hope you can. I know it was longer than some of my videos but felt it needed to be all in one video to properly answer this common assertion.
Didn’t you use to be KJV only? What happened?
I have always used the KJV and NKJV in my preaching and Bible studies. I have always said that the KJV is more exact to the traditional text (which doesn’t remove the equivalent of 1 and 2 Peter from the Greek and Hebrew) while the NKJV is more instantly understandable. Both use the same traditional text passed down to every generation. Some English words translated in the KJV have changed meanings but are still exact from the 1769 understanding of those words. There are those who lie about this and this is why I am sharing this truth as every Christian should. We should all be people of the truth. The truth shall set you free is what the Lord said.
Thank you very much
You are welcome and thanks for watching
Never forget that the translators of the KJV declared it was not their intention to make a new translation but to make a good translation better. Furthermore they declared even the meanest of translations containeth the word of God is indeed the word of God.
The NKJV is a great translation and there are several places where there is room for improvement.
Genesis 29:39 your dwelling shall be of the fatness of the earth should be rendered your dwelling shall be AWAY from the fatness of the earth
1 Samuel 15: 29 .... will not lie nor relent. For He is not a man, that He should relent should be rendered will not lie nor REPENT ........ that He should REPENT
Acts 7:9 And the patriarchs, becoming jealous should be rendered and the patriarchs moved with envy
2 Corinthians 13:5 you are disqualified better rendered you are counterfeit and 2 Corinthians 13:6 not disqualified better rendered not counterfeit
Hebrews 2:16 Does not give aid to angels better rendered take on the nature of angels and give aid to the seed of Abraham take on the seed of Abraham
So there is room for improvement but the modern translations are still more readable and accurate than the KJV .
The KJV does make for a richer reading experience with the thee and thou and thine and ye and giveth and believeth but what applies to the KJV equally applies to the Geneva bible and the ASV and the Tyndale translation and the Great bible
Thanks for sharing your thoughts
The NKJV is my favorite and go to Bible translation. I also use the NASB and the KJV. I think this KJV only movement is damaging to the body of Christ. Believers are supposed to be of one accord, this movement is being used to divide the church further than denominations have done already. If the church would unite and share the gospel of Jesus Christ with compassion and love we would see the power of God move on a mighty way
Amen! Let’s be the church!
There's a big difference between judgemment and condemnation all Christians will at times enter judgement because God loves us such judgments keeps us from condemnation
There are differences between the words and multiple definitions of each word too.
In the dictionary it states:
Condemnation:
noun
con·dem·na·tion ˌkän-ˌdem-ˈnā-shən -dəm-
Synonyms of condemnation
1
: CENSURE, BLAME
… the Quakers, in their uncompromising condemnation of war …
-William Ralph Inge
2
: the act of judicially condemning
3
: the state of being condemned
… in the hopeless hour of condemnation …
-Washington Irving
4
: a reason for condemning
His conduct was sufficient condemnation.
Judgment:
noun
judg·ment ˈjəj-mənt
variants or judgement
Synonyms of judgment
1
a
: the process of forming an opinion or evaluation by discerning and comparing
careful judgment of the odds
b
: an opinion or estimate so formed
is not worth doing in my judgment
2
a
: the capacity for judging : DISCERNMENT
be guided by your own judgment
showing poor judgment
b
: the exercise of this capacity
a situation requiring careful judgment
3
a
: a formal utterance of an authoritative opinion
b
: an opinion so pronounced
4
a
: a formal decision given by a court
b
(1)
: an obligation (such as a debt) created by the decree of a court
(2)
: a certificate evidencing such a decree
5
a
capitalized : the final judging of humankind by God
sinners awaiting Judgment
b
: a divine sentence or decision
specifically : a calamity held to be sent by God
believed their bad luck to be a judgment upon them
6
: a proposition stating something believed or asserted
I believe the KJV is the preserved word and is perfect without any word changes. Even if you accept those changes you mentioned there are problems that you just cant get around. Not to mention changing words mess up your cross referencing etc. If anybody would keep using the NKJV after hearing these changes then it's on them. 1. 1st Corinthians 1:18 KJV says those of us who are saved while NKJV says "being saved" as if it's a process. Indicates works salvation not instant salvation upon believing the gospel. 2.Acts 3:26 changes Jesus from son to servant. That's enough for me to throw it in the trash. Jesus is God not God's servant. 2 Corinthians 2:17 KJV says corrupting the word of God where NKJV changes it to peddling 4. 2 Timothy 2:15 KJV says "study" ( the only place Paul tells us this) NKJV says be diligent. Big difference. 5. This is a big one. Gen 22:8 KJV say God provide himself the lamb NKJV provide FOR himself the lamb. Huge difference. I could go on and on. By the way Genesis 2:1 should be heaven and earth not heavens. Heavens were created in Gen3. In Matthew narrow is the gate was changed to difficult. There really is no defending it. You have to trust that you have the perfect word of God in your hand.
Which KJV do you use then? The 1611? Or the 1769?
The KJV has 8 mistrannslations which are very easy to prove. All the verse in the NT which say first day of the week, should say first of the sabbaths. You can go to the Textus Receptus compare acts 20:7 using the original Greek texts used to produce the 1611 and most modern day bibles. It clearly shows it should say first of the sabbaths. Or one of the Sabbaths if you study letvicus 23. You will learn what the counti g of the sabbaths means.
@@davidc2361 - Only eight? I know of many more than eight, but maybe not as easy to show folks who can't read Hebrew or Greek. Aside from that, the greatest abomination is substituting "Yahweh," the Name above all names, almost 8000 times!
@@CC-iu7sq 1769 the only thing changed is spelling punctuation and things like that. It doesn't change doctrine or veer from the majority text.
@@markrobertsministries That’s objectively false and reiterated talking points given out by the Gipp and Ruckman crowds.
There are dozens of verses where words were taken out and words added and rearranged that changed the meaning of said verses. Not the mention the thousands of updated word and grammar changes to be more relevant to 18th century English.
You’ve never actually read the 1611 KJV. The 1769 is what you read. And it’s a revision with updated English and grammar.
Excellent video Pastor. I was once in the ranks of the KJVO but after collating translations, it is clearly obvious there is so very little differences and nothing doctrinal in the formal equivalences. From the Textus Receptus(28) to the MajorityText(Byzantine Priority) there is 0.4% difference and from the TR to the CT it is 0.8%. I utilize 5 translations and the interlinear. It all comes down to laziness really. People just believe what they are told and fail to be bereans as commanded by God.
Thanks! I do not trust the modern critical text due to the much omission and have made several videos on the differences. I hope you will have opportunity to check some of them out. God bless!
After seeing your graven images on the wall I don't believe I will trust your conclusion . There are several time the nkjv removes the diety of Jesus
Matthew 28:1 KJV says Christ rose on God's Sabbath. The Saturday Sabbath, just before the first day of the week started.
The NKJV clearly says. After the Sabbath.
28 In the end of the sabbath, as it began to dawn toward the first day of the week, came Mary Magdalene and the other Mary to see the sepulchre. (KJV)
28 Now after the Sabbath, as the first day of the week began to dawn, Mary Magdalene and the other Mary came to see the tomb. (NKJV)
The Greek is ὀψέ opse. Both versions are saying the same thing, though the NKJV makes it clearer. One thing to keep in mind is the hours of the sabbath in the Bible (and as currently observed by Jews), ends at nightfall. So, the dawn (which both versions say) is clearly "after the sabbath."
It says as it began to dawn toward the first day of the week so it seems to be talking about Sunday.
Aside from other errors, almost ALL translations SUBSTITUTE the Name of the Almighty, YAHWEH, almost 8000 times!
If that's not a despicable tradition, then I don't know what is, considering the plethora of Scriptures that command and exhort us to "call upon His Name," "sing praise to His Name," glorify His Name," etc. and to substitute it with a title of "the Lord" is at best demeaning to the Almighty Creator, and at worst, blasphemous!
By the way, at 2:02 you state that the seventh Command is "thou shalt not bear false witness," when in fact, I think you meant the 9th ;)
Yes, most do not share the name of God consistently. I have been told the ASV does consistently use the word Jehovah to refer God though. Thanks for the catch on the commandment. We all make mistakes sometimes.
@@PastorScottIngram - To me, it's really blasphemous considering all the Texts and I don't know why more believers don't realize this.
My biggest problem is when I keep mistyping Scripture references, so yeah, no condemnation there, sir. :)
My only issue with the other versions of the Bible other than the KJV is that God told the readers three separate times not to take away or add to His word. Isn't that exactly what is happening when someone is taking one word out and replacing it with another? Serious question. God bless.
Actually it isn't because translations are not the same as the words written down. The translators are not adding to nor taking away in the KJV or NKJV. Many other modern translation do though because their base text in Hebrew and Greek removes the equivalent of 1 and 2 Peter from the bible. I discuss it deeper here: ruclips.net/video/DPEfBat8txI/видео.html
Gail Riplinger is a deceiver. In her book New Age Bible Versions she makes many half-truths and things that just aren't true.
Amen! This is just the truth
The NKJV translates the same Hebrew word nāḥam as "repent" in Numbers 23:19 and Job 42:6 etc. Possibly this is a case where we should allow our definitions to be formed by the context of the words rather than to create a doctrine about what a specific word means and then form the Bible to match that doctrine.
Maybe
To me the use of sir instead of Lord is confusing at best. Maybe even misleading. After listening to your examples of words changed in my mind confirms that the NKJV is inferior to the KJV.
The KJV is more exact to the original words especially if you can understand the 1611 words as they were defined back then. The NKJV is more instantly understandable for today even though it some places it will not be as exact.
There is a difference in a translation being the work of man and a translation being ordained by God. I have never had a problem understanding the KJV.
Translations aren’t inspired. “For the prophecy came not in old time by the will of man: but holy men of God spake as they were moved by the Holy Ghost.” 2 Peter 1:21 holy men did not translate. They spoke.
NKJV has actually improved upon the KJV. It is more accurately translated.
It is good, but according to Lifeway charts, it isn't as literal as the KJV. I discuss that a bit here: ruclips.net/video/BXT1txdzdAc/видео.html
@@PastorScottIngram I understand the KJV is usually more literal. However, there are some places where the KJV is very not literal. Such as when they use English idioms like God forbid, God save the king, cast the same in his teeth, or fetch a compass. None of which are in the Hebrew or Greek. Mathew 13:39 says the harvest is the end of the world. That word world is not in the Greek. It is age. The NKJV corrects this. The KJV also translates thou shall not murder as thou shall not kill, which is not the best translation. There are two different words in Hebrew, just as in English. One that means an illegal and immoral, killing (murder) and the other that means simply to kill. The word in the commandment is clearly murder not kill. Also check Job 17:6 check the Hebrew and the KJV vs NKJV. Check the Greek in Hebrews 2:16 where once again the NKJV improves. And so on. I firmly believe that the NKJV was a much needed update for readability and accuracy. The KJV has become idolized to the point where people will pick apart every other translation but they will never turn that critical eye towards the KJV. It is just assumed to be perfect and therefore any translation that is different is automatically wrong. The KJV was translated by men just like the NKJV and every other English Bible translation.
@@PastorScottIngram after writing out my first response to your comment I realized which video this comment is on. You yourself in this very video just laid out a whole bunch of places where the NKJV more accurately translates the original Hebrew and Greek. The NKJV removed God because KJV put God where it didn’t belong. The same with all those other words, you just went through.
@@Beefcake1982 I am just pointing out the literalness of using “ye” and “thee” in the KJV. The KJV lacks in instant understanding with its archaic wording which the NKJV does better, but it is considered more exact to the original languages. Both are excellent English translations. I am not putting down either one in either video. Just sharing facts.
@@PastorScottIngram You have made some very good videos on the subject and I do appreciate your honesty. I’m sorry if I come off a bit snappy. I guess I’ve gotten defensive about my beloved NKJV. It’s the Bible that brought me to faith and it seems like every time I turn around somebody wants to tell me that it’s not really the word of God and it’s corrupted. Anyway I think you’re an honest man and I thank you for sharing truth. God bless.
I have used the NKJV for as long as I've been reading the Bible seriously. The first Study Bible I ever bought was a NKJV, in fact. I have found it readable, reliable, and have no problems with it. At this point, though I have multiple translations, I've tended to reach for the NKJV and the NASB (1977 or 1995) the most. I'll pick up the KJV sometimes as well (I have several, with no plans to get rid of them). As for the name of God, I don't much go for Jehovah; I much prefer YHWH or Yahweh, since it's closer to the original. And "LORD" in all caps or big and small caps lets me know we're speaking of God's covenant name. As for Ms. Riplinger, I've heard of her but have no intention of reading her book. If an absolute bombshell drops regarding the NKJV's reliability relative to her claims I may rethink that position; but for now, no.
You should check out your study Bible with one of those old outdated KJV side by side on 2 Timothy 2:15 and ask yourself which one makes more sense then maybe go for the difference between the mark going (in) vs going (on) but maybe I don't know what I'm talking about just check for yourself and pray asking God where is his word perfectly purified and preserved from this generation forever like in Psalms12:6-7
@@kaseycooper7141 Not sure I understand the point. In 2 Tim. 2:15, the only question I might have would be "Study" (KJV) versus "Be diligent" (NKJV, NASB). Did you, perhaps, mean a different verse?
It just seemed odd to me that the first verses I ever read told me to study sounded like something I might have heard before like in school or something I know what study means but if I would have read be diligent instead of study first I probably would not be studying the word of God I have many books that say holy Bible across the front but none of the other has spoken to me in such a powerful way as the one that told me to study when I first opened it up after trying to give it away because I did not want to read it I just wanted to listen to the preacher without reading for myself but maybe it's just me
@kaseycooper7141 on February 21 at 12:15 PM (EST) I will be discussing that difference here on the channel . I hope you will be able to check it out.
My understanding is that "be diligent" is a bit closer to the Greek technically, but "be diligent" and "study" are saying the same thing, especially when you consider the rest of 2 Tim. 2:15.
“Christ” - NIV: Removes “Christ” 25 times. - NASB: Removes “Christ” 34 times. - NKJV: Removes “Christ” 1 time. - RSV: Removes “Christ” 32 times. - NRSV: Removes “Christ” 87 times. “Lord” - NIV: Removes “Lord” 352 times. - NASB: Removes “Lord” 438 times. - NKJV: Removes “Lord” 66 times. - RSV: Removes “Lord” 36 times. - NRSV: Removes “Lord” 91 times. - NCV: Removes “Lord” 299 times. - TLB: Removes “Lord” 2,368 times. “Jesus” - NIV: Removes “Jesus” 292 times. - NASB: Removes “Jesus” 64 times. - NKJV: Removes “Jesus” 2 times. - RSV: Removes “Jesus” 53 times. - NRSV: Adds “Jesus” 16 times. “Hell” - NIV: Removes “hell” 40 times. - NASB: Removes “hell” 41 times. - NKJV: Removes “hell” 22 times. - RSV: Removes “hell” 41 times. - NRSV: Removes “hell” 41 times. - NCV: Removes “hell” 39 times. - NLT: Adds “hell” 13 times. “Heaven” - NIV: Removes “heaven” 160 times. - ASV: Removes “heaven” 127 times. - NKJV: Removes “heaven” 50 times. “Blood of Christ”/“The Blood” - NIV: Removes it 41 times. - NASB: Removes it 39 times. - NKJV: Removes it 23 times. - NLT: Removes it 174 times. “Salvation” (Getting Saved) - NIV: Removes “salvation” 42 times. - NASB: Removes “salvation” 4 times. - NKJV: Removes it 2 times. - RSV: Removes “salvation” 33 times. - NRSV: Removes “salvation” 37 times. - NCV: Removes “salvation” 94 times.
Those ideas are what this video is debunking. I hope you had opportunity to watch it all.
I dont understand how people say they have discernment and they r anointed but they have a counterfeit knock off Bible in there hand the old king James says planly Revelation 22:18-19 (KJV) For I testify unto every man that heareth the words of the prophecy of this book, If any man shall add unto these things, God shall add unto him the plagues that are written in this book:
And if any man shall take away from the words of the book of this prophecy, God shall take away his part out of the book of life, and out of the holy city, and from the things which are written in this book.Deuteronomy 4:2 (KJV) Ye shall not add unto the word which I command you, neither shall ye diminish ought from it, that ye may keep the commandments of the LORD your God which I command you.Proverbs 30:5-6 (KJV) Every word of God is pure: he is a shield unto them that put their trust in him.
Add thou not unto his words, lest he reprove thee, and thou be found a liar.Revelation 19:13 (KJV) And he was clothed with a vesture dipped in blood: and his name is called The Word of God.and It goes in one ear and out the other the 10 commandments say do not bare false witness well ur bunk bibles are false witness they have been rewrite by people who do not have authority do do so nkjv esv niv all of them r counterfeit every last one old king James is the true word of GOD.
Let's look at the oldest versions that we have and see what they say.
18 Μαρτυρῶ ἐγὼ παντὶ τῷ ἀκούοντι τοὺς λόγους τῆς προφητείας τοῦ βιβλίου τούτου· ἐάν τις ἐπιθῇ ἐπ’ αὐτά, [o]ἐπιθήσει ὁ θεὸς ἐπ’ αὐτὸν τὰς πληγὰς τὰς γεγραμμένας ἐν τῷ βιβλίῳ τούτῳ· 19 καὶ ἐάν τις ἀφέλῃ ἀπὸ τῶν λόγων τοῦ βιβλίου τῆς προφητείας ταύτης, [p]ἀφελεῖ ὁ θεὸς τὸ μέρος αὐτοῦ ἀπὸ τοῦ ξύλου τῆς ζωῆς καὶ ἐκ τῆς πόλεως τῆς ἁγίας, τῶν γεγραμμένων ἐν τῷ βιβλίῳ τούτῳ.
Obviously to have a translation a word is substituted for a different word, my question is, does that mean that we all need to learn Greek to truly follow what is written? And if so are all versions not in the original language an abomination? Does God and the Holy Spirit speak to us in the languages of the original Bible?
@@adrenalizd bahahahahaha give me a break man lol 😂
@@adrenalizd Psalms 12:6-7 (KJV) The words of the LORD are pure words: as silver tried in a furnace of earth, purified seven times.
Thou shalt keep them, O LORD, thou shalt preserve them from this generation for ever. This means 7 different languages do u understand this or does it need to be in Greek lol
God bless you all, I love the King James Version too and shall refrain from arguing as it is written, I only ask you brothers and sisters, did the King James Version not come from the original Hebrew,Aramaic and Greek, thus the same verses and commandments there were written? Are the arguments you use to say your version is the only version, the same words in the original language? If so do you really think that God only wanted us to read them as such? Are we not told to go out and teach, and how is it we can teach if the tongue is not known to the listeners? I love you all and may God bless you each one.
Edited to add Hebrew and Aramaic to include the Old Testament.
@@adrenalizd the Bible is sacred its not just a book it is HOLY GHOST inspired it is genuine and has no need to be altered or revised or anything at all for that matter and in Hebrew and Greek It say the same thing the old king James 1611 say Deuteronomy 4:2 (KJV) Ye shall not add unto the word which I command you, neither shall ye diminish ought from it, that ye may keep the commandments of the LORD your God which I command you.Revelation 22:18-19 (KJV) For I testify unto every man that heareth the words of the prophecy of this book, If any man shall add unto these things, God shall add unto him the plagues that are written in this book:
And if any man shall take away from the words of the book of this prophecy, God shall take away his part out of the book of life, and out of the holy city, and from the things which are written in this book.Proverbs 30:5-6 (KJV) Every word of God is pure: he is a shield unto them that put their trust in him.
Add thou not unto his words, lest he reprove thee, and thou be found a liar.Psalms 12:6-7 (KJV) The words of the LORD are pure words: as silver tried in a furnace of earth, purified seven times.
Thou shalt keep them, O LORD, thou shalt preserve them from this generation for ever.Revelation 19:13 (KJV) And he was clothed with a vesture dipped in blood: and his name is called The Word of God.John 1:1 (KJV) In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.its about being biblical I love everyone also but principle over personality keep it biblical from the beginning old king James 1611 is just that I yield back lol
What do you do with the mark of the beast as an example where nkjv says on the hand and on the head
Whereas the Kjv says “in both times hand and head
What about deleting and adding ?
Both here scriptures say if you remove I will remove your name from the book of life and adding I will add the plagues of life.
Removing the blood of Jesus shows no fear of God.
I have taken the time to provide a video to answer this concern. You can find it here: ruclips.net/video/onzwxbu1Qyw/видео.html
Regarding conspiracy and superstition; and even marketing:
(KJV) Romans 12:1 I beseech you therefore, brethren, by the mercies of God, that ye present your bodies a living sacrifice, holy, acceptable unto God, which is your reasonable service. 2 *And be not conformed to this world:* but be ye transformed by the renewing of your mind, that ye may prove what is that good, and acceptable, and perfect, will of God.
I would agree,
@@PastorScottIngramI don’t normally talk in biblical verses, but this passage came to mind as I was watching your discussion.
Blessings.
To the NKJV editor who responded to Riplinger: We KJV supporters are NOT stupid ("uninformed" hicks). We are well aware that Riplinger showed in her book the replacement of one English word for another in numerous charts. Tracts are smaller than books, as are their charts. Whether this one tract was not clear, or comprehensive enough, does not negate the accuracy and comprehensiveness of the total work on which the tract is based. It does NOT change the fact that Riplinger is showing the weakening of certain words and sometimes doctrines. The NKJV used some texts other than what the KJV used in its translation. When someone starts referring to the Hebrew or Greek I ask the question: Which Hebrew or Greek? This video just reaffirms my understanding that the NKJV is substantially different from the KJV.
The NKJV used the same texts. The differences did not weaken doctrines, in my opinion, as I have shown here. My point is that we should not use this meme because it's only desire is to deceive and that is not of God. I have been studying Riplinger lately and she didn't have any theological training whatsoever, but she did go to school for advertising and she knows how to get a rise out of people by putting an idea in their heads. Just watch one of her presentations! If one wants to make a point about the accuracy of the KJV, I don't believe she is a good person to get behind. It is better to simply show people the facts of the removal of large portions of scripture in modern translations and then let them decide and I personally believe they will see that the KJV is more exact and the NKJV is simply more instantly understandable to the traditional text as I have said beforehand. Either way, thanks for watching and commenting.
The KJV used texts other than the TR and masoretic as well.
Have you not read on what texts were used for the revisions to the KJV and who performed them?
It’s okay to update language. The English language changes, brother. Beowulf, which is not understandable in modern English, is written in English. Language changes over time.
The NKJV is a terrific translation that God has used and worked though to bring people to him.
God bless you pastor my question concerning the NKJV is that it removes the second person plural pronouns which leads to and accuracy and misinterpretation which makes the NKJV irrelevant? What would be the purpose of having a Bible that that can lead to inaccuracy and misinterpretation?
@terrellking4174 I think the removal of the second person pronouns does make the NKJV less exact, but I don’t think it disqualifies it as a usable translation though because of that fact. There was actually a big discussion when they were making the NKJV about including the second person pronouns but the choice to do it without them was decided.
Thanks pastor for the response correct me if I’m wrong but we as Christian’s believe the God the father threw the Holy Spirit Author of book
Obviously the nkjv would say that
Say what?
Wow! Ya'll love the NKJV with all it's corruption and conflicting verses. I'll stick with my King James Bible!
No worries about you sticking with the KJV. I think that is just fine. I just don't like it when people lie about the NKJV as Gail Riplinger did in her tract.
Gail wasn’t lying
I am just sharing the facts. The facts don’t lie. How people receive them may be different, but these are the simple facts.
KJV is changing too especially the ones online but in print also.
Where have you seen changes?
Just happened on your post here, and I am moved to say a little something. I am nearly 64 years old, and I have intensively studied and taught English for almost 40 of those years. I seem to have a natural ear for what is right and what is wrong in any English text - a love of words, their feeling, their texture...even the "taste" of them on my tongue. I'ts weird, I know, but it is...let me just say it's a talent I have. I've had, as a sinner, much experience with Psalm 51, and especially with v.2: "wash me throughly from my iniquity." I even remember reading an article that discussed why "throughly" was a better word than "thoroughly ." Yet now, when I go there, in my KJV, it's "thoroughly" (although a 100 or so year old KJV bible I own still has "throughly"). But it's this next one that is really "messing with my head." I remember, solid as a rock, learning the Lord's Prayer with "and forgive us our trespasses, as we forgive those that trespass against us. "as WE forgive THOSE, that TRESSPASS against US." My developing young future English teacher mind could never forget the cadence - the rhythm - the rise and fall of the stressed and unstressed syllables - the glorious music of them (my mother used to reminisce about how, when I was around 2-3 years old, I somehow heard the term "corrugated cardboard," and I said nothing but that for two months, so fascinated was I with the sound and feel of those words). But now, I find, even in the 100-year-old KJV, "Forgive us our debts, as we forgive our debtors." It's heavy. It's clunky. No rhythm or music at all. I can explain easily about how you are wrong about any other so-called "Mandela Effect," but not this one. It seriously disturbs me. Thanks for listening.
@@nerowolfe929 Could you please expand on this? Additionally, one would expect that someone who teaches English would present their thoughts in a more structured manner. Instead, it reads like a wall of text commonly found on social media, created by someone who does not care to construct their words in a way that is correct and visually appealing. This struck me as odd, as I would have anticipated something different.
Something like this, maybe?
I recently came across your post, and I felt compelled to share my thoughts. I am nearly 64 years old and have spent almost 40 years intensively studying and teaching English. I seem to possess a natural ear for discerning what is right and wrong in any English text. My love for words encompasses their feeling, texture, and even the "taste" of them on my tongue. It might sound peculiar, but it's a talent I have.
As someone who has had considerable experience with Psalm 51, particularly with verse 2 that states, “wash me throughly from my iniquity,” I recall reading an article discussing why “throughly” is a superior word compared to “thoroughly.” Interestingly, when I read this passage in my King James Version (KJV), it presents “thoroughly.” However, I possess an old KJV Bible, over 100 years old, that still uses “throughly.”
What truly perplexes me is the Lord’s Prayer. I distinctly remember learning it with the phrase “and forgive us our trespasses, as we forgive those that trespass against us.” I can still hear the cadence and rhythm in my mind-the rise and fall of stressed and unstressed syllables, creating a beautiful musicality. My mother often reminisces about how, at around 2-3 years old, I was captivated by the term “corrugated cardboard” and repeated it for two months, enchanted by the sound and feel of those words.
Now, however, I find that even in my 100-year-old KJV, the prayer states, “Forgive us our debts, as we forgive our debtors.” This version feels heavy and clunky, lacking the rhythm and music I once cherished. While I can easily explain why you might be mistaken about other so-called “Mandela Effects,” this particular change genuinely disturbs me.
@@nerowolfe929 You are talking about Matthew 6:12, you just have the versions mixed up is all.
"And forgive us our trespasses, as we forgive them that trespass against us." New Matthew Bible (NMB)
"And forgive us our debts,
As we forgive our debtors." New King James Version (NKJV)
"And forgive us our debts, as we forgive our debtors." King James Version (KJV)
@Helix_22 I'm sorry, but you missed the point about my age. I was brought up in a conservative Southern Baptist church in Roanoke, Virginia in the 1960s. EVERYBODY used the King James Version. I learned the Lord's Prayer from the KJV in Sunday school. "Tresspasses" was a word precisely fitted to my youthful aesthetic. I could not have gotten it wrong.
Thank you for your response. I would have liked to have heard more on Riplingers perspective. This seemed one sided. Also, transliterations are not more understandable. Certainly, Jehovahs Witnesses like hades and Gehenna.
You can find more of Gail riplinger’s talks on RUclips. Just type here name in the search.
I will stick with KJV. How confusing for group reading in unison. The King James Bible Research Council clears this up.
I agree there are issues in group reading, but I wouldn’t suggest everyone read the NIV which removes verses in order to make it simpler. At least the NKJV does not remove verses. Anyone that says differently is lying.
Is the NKJV an improvement of the KJV?
The following is from Sam Gipp's The Answer Book.
QUESTION: The New King James Version is based on the Antiochian manuscripts. Is it an improvement over the King James Bible?
ANSWER: No.
EXPLANATION: The New King James Version is to the English Bible what the Alexandrian manuscripts are to GreekÄa corruption of a pure text by men who hold the deplorable doctrine that the Bible cannot be perfect (regardless of what they may say when they preach) and must be corrected by the feeble intellect of man.
The New King James Version, unlike most modern translations, is based on the correct Antiochian manuscripts instead of the corrupt Alexandrian manuscripts. Unfortunately, the men doing the translation work view the Bible as imperfect. They would vehemently deny this charge in public because their jobs depend on it, but in FACT they do not believe that ANY Bible is perfect. Not even their own New King James Version! Thus, to them, the Bible is lost ("settled" in heaven) and the minds of scholars are the only hope of rescuing its "thoughts" from oblivion.
Many of the men on the board of translators may indeed be great preachers and pastors, but that by no means entitles them to correct the Bible.
Sincerity cannot improve on perfection. Thus, instead of "making a good thing better" they have only managed, for all of their trouble, to make a "perfect thing tainted".
It must be remembered, there is a great deal of prestige in sitting on the board of translators of a "modern" version of the Bible
(Matthew 23:5-7).
I guess that is Sam Gimp’s opinion.
The fact still remains, nothing is to be added or omitted. I believe changing is the same as adding and/or omitting. I'm KJV all the way. If any word is difficult to understand it can be found in the Webster's Dictionary 1828 edition...on-line.
Do you believe the English of the 1769 KJV is the inspired words of God or is it in the original words of the Hebrew and Greek?
Using that logic, it should have never been translated into English.
@@RebeccaInTheWord Not my logic...in God's word in Revelation. You might want read it and/or want to take that with Him on judgement day.
@@donnaguyton153 The Word of God is true. Hallelujah!
Wolf in cring clothing
In these videos, I am a shepherd just trying protecting the Lord’s flock from the wolves. Truth is always what God desires to be presented. Please make plans to view a video on this channel that will go LIVE on January 24, 2025 called “Is the New King James Version a Gateway Bible to Modern Translations?”
Well well well
Here are the people Jesus said
Many will come in my name and say here he is there he is
Now we see Lord all these people who claim to be in you and yes Lord you are right,
there are indeed many.
1000 + new corrupt books saying these Bibles are not Gods (Jesus) preserved word.
Not sure what you are trying to say there.
The new king james makes God a liar in Job 26 verse 13.
The new king james makes God a liar in hebrews 3 verse 16😅
KJV only
Nothing wrong with that
The word hell isn't even biblical.
“Hell” is technically okay, as long as one realizes it just means “hole” or “place where something is hidden or unseen,” and has no inherent meaning of “inescapable torture chamber” as most now mistakenly assume it means.
@@DrewCosten Amen
@@DrewCostenwell thats what jesus said it was many times and thats what everyone else said it was. you cant read the word hell to mean "hole" to prove there isnt an afterlife. what? do we not go to heaven either? and im not saying this from a kjv only perspective or anything.
@@swamprat22 I didn’t say anything about an afterlife. That said, I don’t believe in one, no. Only a resurrection. Too big a topic for a RUclips comment, but search for “What the Bible really says about heaven, hell, judgement, death, sin, and salvation” on the True Biblical Freedom page with my name and you’ll find a detailed explanation, using only the KJV.
That's nonsense. Keep telling yourself that to feel better.
1 John 3:7-8 (KJV 1900): let no man deceive you: he that doeth righteousness is righteous, even as he is righteous. 8 He that committeth sin is of the devil; for the devil sinneth from the beginning.
Simple.
Amen! Deception is of the devil