Gary Bartell The deeper you study the more you see Jesus in the Old Testament, and prophecy all over the place. What's good about the KJV is that it causes you to dig deeper and study harder, finding out what certain words mean from their original language on your own. You can really feel the Holy Spirit during those deep study moments. The modern versions of the Bible have done the study for you, watering down that intimacy with the Word, and also changing the text altogether. A very percise and targeted deception to the body of Christ by the master deciever.
@V Max which verses were changed? I just downloaded a Geneva1599. I looked at some key scripture that are very important in my opinion, and in context of salvation. They say the same thing the KJV does. Except with old English writing Example GNV 16For God so loued the worlde, that hee hath giuen his onely begotten Sonne, that whosoeuer beleeueth in him, should not perish, but haue euerlasting life. For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life.
I respect you opinion, but...Interpreting the original texts and translating it into the language that everyday people can understand is the best in my opinion, humble or not. If we want to spread the gospel it is especially true for non-Christians unfamiliar with 16th Century vernacular. Start throwing thees and thous at them and they think of the pilgrims, not Jesus. Jesus conveyed God's message to the people using parables about things they were familiar with, like sheep, water, bread, coins, rain and wind. People today do not understand 16th Century language as well as they did in the 16th Century. However, the KJV is beautiful and lyrical, and many of my favorite passages in the Bible sound more familiar to me in the KJV, because I grew up with that. I used to read books by classical authors as a child, but it took me a while to translate their archaic terminology into my ordinary thought processes. I know, because the Bible scholars tell me, that there are accurate translations of the original scripture into modern language. With all the translations available today, why not do your own research into which translations are considered by Bible scholars to be accurate? Look at all of them for a particular verse to gain a better understanding of it. We don't have to choose sides. Jesus came for all who believe; the devil wants to sow disunity among us. Humans have a tendency to want to split up over nonessential issues.
History is a chronological record of events, often including an explanation of, or commentary on, those events. The Bible is the sacred book of Christianity, written by more than 40 authors, inspired by God, over a period of 1,500 years. The original Bible was communicated in Hebrews, Greek and Aramaic by men inspired by God to communicate to man what God wanted to communicate to men. Men devoted to God have over the years studied copies of the original text of the Bible and translated the Hebrews, Greek and Aramaic into the language of their day. I believe the men who wrote the KJV, Geneva Bible and many other translations based their translations on their understanding of the original text, in order to make clear the meaning of the original text to the people of their day. They prayed to God that He would guide them to accurately translate his Word so that people would understand. I am glad that they did. God bless them. I am glad I don't have to learn Hebrews, Greek and Aramaic. I am glad that God is a God that wants His people to know His Word and will make sure that we have accurate translations in a vernacular that we can understand. I am also glad that He has given us the intelligence to understand when someone is not interested in knowing and presenting God's Word, but is interested in promoting a false doctrine or diverting us from seeking to know God's Word.
If you take the time with the King James old English it comes just as naturally as modern. Problem is we live in a society where putting your own effort into something is too hard and it should be left to others, so we get all these translations in the end. Give the KJV a chance it’s a beautiful book.
Shannon Keys but it's pointless. I don't speak that language. I'd rather read a language I'm familiar with. Might as well learn Greek if your going to do that. Some of you act as if Paul and Luke wrote in Elizabetheon English. Geez, it's a translation....get over it!
My first English Bible is the KJV, but english my 3rd language, its really hard sometimes for me to understand the old english, so i bought ESV and NASB. Now i understand them both better. Holy Spirit will guide you to the truth. GOD Bless us all.
The Good Samaritan The deeper you study the more you see Jesus in the Old Testament, and prophecy all over the place. What's good about the KJV is that it causes you to dig deeper and study harder, finding out what certain words mean from their original language on your own. You can really feel the Holy Spirit during those deep study moments. The modern versions of the Bible have done the study for you, watering down that intimacy with the Word, and also changing the text altogether. A very percise and targeted deception to the body of Christ by the master deciever.
I still use my KJV. The "let" example isn't hard to figure out. I like using a Strongs concordance alongside and engage in deep study, figuring the translation myself. I just feel much fuller and throughly fed.
Bible Illustrated Exactly. Since I was a child I always pray before I read/study, asking God by His Spirit to help me get a clear understanding of His Word. Over the years it's become easier to perceive. The deeper you study the more you see Jesus in the Old Testament, and prophecy all over the place. What's good about the KJV is that it causes you to dig deeper and study harder, finding out what certain words mean from their original language on your own. You can really feel the Holy Spirit during those deep study moments. The modern versions of the Bible have done the study for you, watering down that intimacy with the Word, and also changing the text altogether. A very percise and targeted deception to the body of Christ by the master deciever. Sorry for the long story and the late response.
My walk with the Lord has actually been thrown off because all the debates on translations. I didn't grow up in the church but when I did go to church as a young kid I remember specifically using the KJV so I just figured that was the one and only translation, so when I got saved 8 years ago I started using a KJV, it wasn't until later I realized there were multiple translations which I began to seek out and it began to confuse me. So currently I'm still back and forth between the KJV and ESV but I prefer the KJV over all. It just seems right to me.
@@braydenshanley7435They're making the argument that this discussion _should not_ be in front of non-believers because it can give them a sense of disorganization--for lack of a better word. It's similar to how people say parents should never argue in front of their children. I am a KJVer, but I currently recommend the CSB to people who have never read the Bible before. When I'm quoting the Bible *to* someone, though, I use the KJV because I can translate it and explain the meaning/passage to them. The point is to remove as many obstacles as possible to encourage people to dive into the Word of God of their own will.
@@braydenshanley7435 Seeing how you attempted to twist words in your response to the OP--and your response to me--it appears that you are simply trolling. Start with 2 Timothy 3:16 about the Word of God. For the rest of your comments, I'll leave you with these parting words: Proverbs 1:7 (KJV) "The fear of the LORD is the beginning of knowledge: but fools despise wisdom and instruction." Proverbs 29:9 (KJV) "If a wise man contendeth with a foolish man, whether he rage or laugh, there is no rest." May God open your eyes and bless you.
Thanks Frank. I look fwd to notifications of your video's, which are not only interesting, but as someone who debates various Atheists and Muslims online; I am now learning how to tackle some of the tougher questions about our Christian faith through your Q&A style videos... questions that are not always black and white, but which you tend to explain in laymans terms, yet without excluding the historicity behind why we believe what we do as Christians. Helpful! God bless you Frank.
I admire believers who really want the purest available version of the Scriptures, it truly is the best of motives. I’m not sure why it seems impossible for some to believe that God is unwilling or incapable or not interested in preserving His Word accurately beyond 1611.
This comment is confusing. Are you for the KJV only or are you saying that other versions are alright to use? I think you messed up on your wording in that last sentence but I could be wrong.
@@tylert5096 Paraphrase: KJV only believers think that the 1611 English King James Version is the only accurate English translation of the Scriptures. If that was the case it would imply that God has decided (for some reason) that He is not going to preserve His Word through any other English translation for the last 410 years and counting. I don't understand that idea because it seems like God has gone through great pains to make His Word available to nearly every nation in every generation in order that more people might know and follow Him. Sorry that the first comment was not clear. Hope that helps.
@@vincer7824 The word of God is pure and stands strong and incorruptible. Why would he change it? Proverbs 30:5-6 KJV [5] Every word of God is pure: he is a shield unto them that put their trust in him. [6] Add thou not unto his words, lest he reprove thee, and thou be found a liar. Psalm 12:6-7 KJV [6] The words of the Lord are pure words: as silver tried in a furnace of earth, purified seven times. [7] Thou shalt keep them, O Lord, thou shalt preserve them from this generation for ever. God knows what he’s doing, we don’t need to question his authority. Not like the devil does. Genesis 3:1 KJV [1] Now the serpent was more subtil than any beast of the field which the Lord God had made. And he said unto the woman, Yea, hath God said, Ye shall not eat of every tree of the garden? Scholarship is good if your defending God, but if your questioning His authority you cause lots of confusion. The translation of the KJV was given by inspiration of God and its publication was, since it has sold 6 billion copies.
@@vincer7824 Ill have you know brother that modern versions chop up verses, remove them entirely, and take out chapters. They are different. As well as the greek texts they are based on. In the end, its authority of man vs. The one book that has proven itself for 400 years to be the monarch of books, the word of God without the simple errors all other translations get into funk with (who killed Goliath, Jesus and Satan are the morning star, etc.)
JK 1611 funny thing is people will say the ESV NIV et cetera are easier to read. That may be true that they are easier to read but they are harder to understand. It took me a long time to realize salvation is a free gift and you only need to receive it once and you don’t have to do anything for it NOTHING but understand believe and accept it (faith). Now all these other versions are secretly (and sometimes more obviously) works based. You can’t work your way into heaven your works are as filthy rags for your salvation. Also the NIV calls Jesus Satan look it up. That’s a terrible translation if you ask me. The KJV is the only version that calls Lucifer by his name.
Latent Tweet I would still argue that the English language is far to simple to explain true meaning of what the Bible is trying to portray as we use one word for things that have many different meanings in Greek and Hebrew. For example, there are many different words for love in Greek and in the English version they are all grouped into one word “love”.
JDrocks4ever yes I use that analogy a lot on the different types of love. Greek and Hebrew are pretty cool because one verb alone can have a gender or case that it’s conjugated into that tells a lot more than what English does. Maybe that’s why these languages were the most used for bible translations. However I also found that some people don’t like what the Bible says in English so they try to make it say something different by using Greek and Hebrew. Look at pastor Steven Anderson’s recent documentary on Cyprus where he reads koine Greek to modern Greek speakers it talks a lot about this subject. The best analogy I use for Greek Hebrew and English is like watching a football game on and old CRT tv. In the end you know who won and who lost. You saw a fumble. But Greek and Hebrew is like watching the game in 8K high def, where you can see the replay of the guys glove that had sweat drops on it that caused the fumble. (I don’t watch football so I’m making this up but you get the point.) Either way one has more clarity but they both have the gospel of Jesus Christ. Some countries the Bible is banned and people may only hear the gospel through other people that memorized it or are paraphrasing it.
@@latenttweet I definitely agree. The KJV is a great version and the NIV is kinda an antichrist version in my opinion because of the reasons you stated and it removes important details that makes it less powerful. The main objective is coming to the knowledge of the truth and salvation. Studying the Greek, Hebrew, and Aramaic translations helps to give us more profound insight that has great use in teaching. The Bible is awesome man!
@@JDrocks4ever AMEN brother. NIV: Man does not live by bread alone. KJV: Man does not live by bread alone, but by every word of God. what's that verse about adding or removing from the books? ;) I am currently studying greek and Hebrew and so far it has been a real blessing and helped me to convey the word even better even to English speakers!
KJV is a direct translation of the original Hebrew & Greek text. It is the English standard of all English Bible. Anyone who attacks the KJV aren't true Christians for the KJV is the written Word of God.
GplusGains even the KJV is NOT translated word for word. It’s not about it being completely accurate because that can never be. It’s about getting the meaning of it across.
@@cr7069 I said it's a direct translation from the original Hebrew and Greek. Some books are translated from a book that's been translated from the original source. In any translation, word for word translation is impossible. I hope this clears up your misunderstanding.
NKJV and KJV is what I prefer. I've heard some say that without KJV you can't be saved. The early church didn't even have a Bible, and they were saved. There are Christians in Brazil who speak Portuguese, and they don't read the KJV. Revelation 7:9 says there will be all nations, tribes, peoples, and tongues worshipping the Lamb. I love both my KJV and NKJV, but they are not the way to Heaven, faith in Jesus Christ, and His death, burial, and resurrection for us is. (1 Corinthians 15:1-4)
Sons of Thunder Baptist The deeper you study the more you see Jesus in the Old Testament, and prophecy all over the place. What's good about the KJV is that it causes you to dig deeper and study harder, finding out what certain words mean from their original language on your own. You can really feel the Holy Spirit during those deep study moments. The modern versions of the Bible have done the study for you, watering down that intimacy with the Word, and also changing the text altogether. A very percise and targeted deception to the body of Christ by the master deciever.
@@reggiejohnson3391 Basically what you're saying is you often have a hard time understanding the King James, so you study deeper into the Greek wording by yourself, to try to understand better what the book is saying. The satisfaction your feeling above all other translations is the fact you're not sure you understand it, and by digging deeper yourself, you're slowly learning Greek, and words from the original bible language. Which IS, what bible translations are doing today. I'm not saying EVERY bible translation is good, I'm saying there are VERY respectable translations out there, equal to, or better than the KJV in modern English. It's just fact. If I told you the Geneva Bible had authority over King James because it was first, and any differences the two bibles had were solved by using the Geneva Bible only, and the KJV is corrupting God's word, would you believe me? And why not? I could say the enemy deceived mankind for 400 years. How is that any different than what you're saying? We look at MANUSCRIPTS. We need to give more credit to modern translations, because there are God's people leading us into truth, JUST as the Geneva bible translators and King James Translators did. If you don't understand how language evolves, modern languages for modern people, then I'm not sure you understand translation at all. If you believe Satan took over God's word after 1611, then I suppose you're free to believe what you please,
@@KyleSurette13 There are entire websites that break down the many ways the Alexandria based translations have not only removed the deity from Jesus--but have also equated Jesus to Satan. Do what I did: pray to God to open your eyes, mind and heart to the truth...and really mean it. I guarantee you, God Will reveal the truth to you. I have yet to find an English translation more faithful to God and Jesus Christ than the KJV.
The KJV upholds the Deity of Christ in I Tim. 3:16: KJV: "... God was manifest in the flesh..." ESV: "... He was manifested in the flesh..." NASV: "... He who was revealed in the flesh..." NIV: "... He appeared in a body..."
Gary Gothlin The deeper you study the more you see Jesus in the Old Testament, and prophecy all over the place. What's good about the KJV is that it causes you to dig deeper and study harder, finding out what certain words mean from their original language on your own. You can really feel the Holy Spirit during those deep study moments. The modern versions of the Bible have done the study for you, watering down that intimacy with the Word, and also changing the text altogether. A very percise and targeted deception to the body of Christ by the master deciever.
The question has never been and should never be which translation we like best or feels most comfortable to us. It should be which translation is the closest and most accurate translation of what was written in the original manuscripts by the original writers. 1 Timothy 3:16 (ESV) says "Great indeed, we confess, is the mystery of Godliness: He was manifested in the flesh, vindicated by the Spirit, seen by angels, proclaimed among the nations, believed on in the world, taken up in glory." There is no confusion, lack or clarity, or any misinterpretation there. KJV doesn't even mention Jesus by name---you are inferring that from the context and the surrounding verses. Of course this is speaking of Jesus, and when it refers to the mystery of Godliness and describes Him this way, of course it is upholding and proclaiming His deity. The other versions do the same. I have no quarrel with the KJV or your preference for it, but it unreasonable and simply untrue to say that it is the only "correct" or "real" version of God's word.
The NIV says, "He appeared in the flesh", not "He appeared in a body" They are all saying the same thing. The verse is talking about Jesus, and Jesus is who? God. This is something you should by default gather AS you read, its not an extra step. Though if a Bible is actually removing parts then be careful, but anyone should be asking God what Bible versions to read, study, and memorize from. They are not to decide, He is.
I read king james first , then if I dont understand I read other versions but all of them have helped me grow closer to God. If something doesn't read or sound right pray and ask God.
Bors de Ganys Exactly. The deeper you study the more you see Jesus in the Old Testament, and prophecy all over the place. What's good about the KJV is that it causes you to dig deeper and study harder, finding out what certain words mean from their original language on your own. You can really feel the Holy Spirit during those deep study moments. The modern versions of the Bible have done the study for you, watering down that intimacy with the Word, and also changing the text altogether. A very percise and targeted deception to the body of Christ by the master deciever.
We are King James bible BELIEVERS not apologists treating God's word as any other book written by men. You either believe God preserved His word or you do not. You will never be able to prove where God's word is just as you cannot prove that God exists. Hebrews 11:6 “But without faith it is impossible to please him: for he that cometh to God must believe that he is, and that he is a rewarder of them that diligently seek him.” God's ways are not our ways and who will tell Him how He should move? God has preserved His word- you either believe it or you make up your own word. It is not a matter of academics or preferences but of FAITH.
Why does God's Word have to be preserved in English? Why can't it be preserved in the original Greek and Hebrew. KJV-onlyism is just plain Anglo-centric.
Hello Chow, do you read Hebrew and Greek? And just like God chose Hebrew and Greek for the originals (which do NOT exist since the first century) why can He not choose another language for His complete and perfect word. Especially since in His foreknowledge He knew English would be the most widely used language for the end times. And God is not Anglo-centric- there were bibles in other languages before the KJB (Syriac, Latin, German, French to name a few) but the final purified word is the King James Authorized bible.
If by not exists you mean that Hebrew and English have evolved into their modern forms, then I agree. However, that also means that the KJV English also "does not exists" as it is different from modern English. English is just another language that the Bible was translated into. I do not deny it's importance in today's world but to elevate it as you have is ludicrous.
I believe God preserved His word just as you do. The difference is that Jesus Christ is the one and only TRUE word of God. Everything else we have is a written recording of what God did and said. Yes, He inspired the writers and they wrote what He told them to. The issue is not whether God's word has been preserved---the issue is clarity for the reader. We are told to rightly divide the word of truth.
Chow, I am not elevating a language but a book written in that language. Was God elevating Hebrew in the Old Testament or Greek for the New Testament? No, He does as He pleases and who are we to object.
Agreed, one can also look at the documentary "New world order bible versions", side by side comparison and honest discussion with dissenting arguments.
Why are there so many Bible Translations? Money, the kjv is the only Bible you can print without owing soneone a royalty. You can change any Bible by 10% and have your own Bible Version. How accurate is anything if it is changed by 10%???
There are many Bible translations because there are believers devoted to God, who want to obey him and take the Gospel message to as many people as possible.
Many versions give the impression Jesus lies to His brothers in John 7:8 by leaving the word "yet" out. In the KJV Jesus says, "I go not up yet unto this feast". If Jesus is our Holy Saviour He must always be Holy, dishonesty is unholy.
Scribes frequently added words to make a text make more sense or to correct problematic statements. It's not about which reading makes more sense, it's about which reading is more accurate to the original text.
@Bryan Jacobs Early codices P66 P75 (both c. 175-225 CE) and 03 (c. 325-375 CE) contain ΟΥΠΟ (ουπω, not yet) at John 7:8, while the later codex 01 (c. 375-425 CE) has ΟΥΚ (ουκ, not) at that place. So the original had “yet”, so that means the scribes erase the “yet” word.
Nice devil fingers... The ONLY version of the bible under constant attack/criticism is the King James Version. When I was born again, I had no idea which version to read so I prayed that God would help me. I was given 4 different bibles and I read the first line of each and rejected them. I "knew" they weren't right. The KJV was like finally coming home after a long and arduous journey. I LOVE my bible, it's beautiful and wonderful and the TRUTH.
KJV is not the best translation out there, but (for English language) it historically the most important and it is definitely one of the most beautiful. I got one during my trip to New York, and it is a beautiful edition of a beautiful translation.
Bible Illustrated The deeper you study the more you see Jesus in the Old Testament, and prophecy all over the place. What's good about the KJV is that it causes you to dig deeper and study harder, finding out what certain words mean from their original language on your own. You can really feel the Holy Spirit during those deep study moments. The modern versions of the Bible have done the study for you, watering down that intimacy with the Word, and also changing the text altogether. A very percise and targeted deception to the body of Christ by the master deciever.
Don’t just stick to one translation. And look into the original interpretation as much as possible. With the resources we have at our finger tips it’s not that hard to study for yourself.It’s that simple!
The NASB translation is the most literal according to the Critical Text... If a person does not recognize the Critical Text as the most reliable text, the conclusion could be drawn that the NASB IS not the most accurate. Additionally, earlier manuscripts that are found does not automatically imply accuracy...
We currently have asimilar situation in our country (Philippines) where a new "taglish" (filipino-english) version just recently this month that uses slangs from both languages and a lot of Christians from different denominations find skeptical and caused a lot of outrage apparently due to how the language is being used to translate the Bible. I'm curious if this insight would explain it?
I think that was based on Koine Greek wherein that's the language spoken at the time of Jesus. In Filipino, "salitang kalye". That's why, Pinoy version is based on Koine Greek. I don't know the whole idea. That's just what I heard 😅
No matter the version one may use, consider this, the the Bible is a message given to the people of God. Any understanding must be gained by the help of the Holy Spirit. He is our teacher, and he takes the things of Christ and shows them unto us. There are teachers in colleges and churches and seminaries that have not the Spirit, and teaching those who are like unto themselves. These having not the Spirit are carnal in their understanding, no matter their knowledge of Greek and Hebrew and historical knowledge of world religions. They know not the Spirit, he is not with them, neither is he in them. The word of God is spiritual and grace is required for spiritual understanding. Peace on earth and good will towards men.
No one askes you to rewrite a letter when they don't understand the meaning of a word in the letter. No, you look it up or ask the writer what he meant. Simple Stuff. KJB is the perfect preserved word of God. Thank you, Lord. These are "minor issues" he says? But God says EVERY word of God is pure. The point is God promised to preserve His word. Where is it today in 2021? I believe it is the KJB for English speaking people. If you don't believe this to be so, then where do you believe God's perfect word is, that He promised to preserve? B/c I believe God.
The NASB is NOT the most accurate. There are tons of contradictions in it such as Galatians 3:16 and Genesis 12:7. These 2 scriptures nullify the other in the NASB. The KJV however has it translated exactly the way it was written.
Dost thee believeth thatith the priesteth in the 16ith centuryith were giftedith inith interpretingith Hebrewith, Greekith and Amarameicith moreith faithfullyith thanith theseith 21stith centuryith scholarsith?
You show your ignorance of why the "thee's" and "ye's" are needed to be there to understand the context properly. To answer your question: Yes, absolutely.
2 Thessalonians 2:3 & 2:7 use the word "let". Does anyone understand what Frank said "we would get a wrong interpretation today since "let" had a different meaning in 1611???
I’ve hear it said that the best translation of the Bible is a READ one! Another is the best translation of the Bible is ALL (not any) of them. By that I mean if you will consult a word for word, a thought for thought (dynamic equivalent) and another that tries to blend these two approaches together you will see how each approach contributes to our understanding of Scripture. My favorite approach is using Blue Letter Bible to arrange all of the translations I consult by I ordering them from the top: “word for word” (NASV), a blend (NIV) to thought for thought (New Living Translation). The more (up to a point) the better on really difficult to translate passages. The New English Translation (NET) full translator notes edition can allow you to see the translators pros and cons notes of translation. Hope that helps.
You can either read the word of God (KJV) or the lies of satan (everything else)... your choice. If you are too lazy to learn King James English... then enjoy being utterly confused with no assurance of any of the authorities of God 👍
Right! No one askes you to rewrite a letter when they don't understand the meaning of a word in the letter. No, you look it up or ask the writer what he meant. Simple Stuff. KJB s the perfect preserved word of God. Thank you, Lord. These are "minor issues" he says? But God says EVERY word of God is pure. The point is God promised to preserve His word. Where is it today in 2021? I believe it is the KJB for English.
Frank says there are no major issues with the newer translations. I'm going to show just one which should completely dispel that view. In the NASB, in Acts 4:28, "predestined" is used where the KJV uses "determined". If you read the passage, the NASB is saying that God predestined the evil acts of those who crucified Jesus. That would make God a sinner if the NASB is correctly translated.
God is Sovereign.“I am God, and there is no other; I am God, and there is none like me...I say: 'My purpose will stand, and I will do all that I please'” (Isaiah 46:9-10).
Christopher McFall But isn't that greek word translated as predestined in the NASB in Acts 4:28 translated as predestined in other passages in the KJV?
How can we be saved if Jesus is never sacrificed? God is above all. He is not to be crammed into the parameters YOU give him. No English translation is the perfect Word. Because it's obviously not Aramaic, Hebrew or the koine Greek. We must study across translations - preferably texts based off thousands of manuscripts not the handful KJV is.
Sean R. The only time the KJV uses predestinated is where it talks about Gods elect. What I know about greek is that context and sentence structure has a big bearing on what way it is translated to english. The video is about english translations. I'm showing where the new, supposedly better translations have got it wrong. Determined and predestined mean different things in english. And that's only one of a ton of examples.
Robert Contreras. No mistakes or contradictions in the KJV. Tons in the other, vatican inspired and endorsed versions from corrupt manuscripts. If you don't believe God preserved his word, what are you reading? The point about "predestined vs determined" is in the english meanings. If God predestined the crucifixion, then he caused men to sin, making him a sinner. Do you see the point being made?
If you truly desire the REAL Biblical texts, Tell the Vatican to release them ALL. Whom do you believe put "King James into power" ? Who and what was the "Great inquisition " when did it stop and what transpired at that relative time? If you believe that any of our Bibles are true and not tainted , then you are lost... Seek ye the Holy Spirit and pray pray pray on this!
"King James English" was never used as common language, ever. Even though the words may have changed in meaning, it is lazy not to seek for the meaning of them as they were written, just lazy. If the translators of any version had been that lazy we would never have had the Bible in the English language. Things that are different, are not the same. Even the "modern" translations from the "older" manuscripts don't agree with one another. They say different thing, therefore they cannot be the same and if they say different things they cannot all be the Word of God unless you believe in relativism. They say different things and remove so many vital words and create so much vagueness. Many of the people that defend the "modern" translations are viewing these with a foreknowledge of the truth they already know from their previous use of the King James version, they see the verses with the missing words because they are already in their mind. Another thing to consider is that the "older" a text is doesn't necessarily determine it's authenticity. The number of manuscripts that have been complied that agree with those used by the translators of the KJB are far more than the few used in the "modern" versions. The manuscripts used by Wescott and Hort to compile what these "modern" translations all use don't even all agree with each other. They were also "lost" for centuries until Wescott and Hort "found" them, which means from the second century until they were "rediscovered" the true Word of God was not being used. Throughout that time the letters that the churches were sending back and forth had scripture exactly as the KJB translated it, not as the modern translations have written them. This being the case, Psalm 12:6-7 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" must not be true? No, God has preserved His word and we have it.
That last line is the most important. There are differences in the translations, and there are actual differences in the texts! We must embrace the minor contradictions as proof of the accounts authenticity. A police officer will tell you if four separate stories match perfectly, every detail, then the story is most likely a lie, because no two people see EXACTLY the same thing. That's the problem with saying the entire bible is "the word of God" instead of saying that the bible CONTAINS "the word of God." In 1st Corinthians 7:25 Paul says that what follows is NOT the word of God, but is the opinion of a trustworthy servant. If Paul lived today and we told him that what HE said in that verse is now considered "the word of God", Paul would slap us upside the head.
Contradictions is authenticity in 2018? Isn't God suppose to be the one inspiring these men? If so? How can there be contradictions? You Christians are going out of your way to sound dumb
For what I see, the King James translation is truly one of the best we have. But as a new Christian, I'm so happy with my NIV. I struggled A LOT the first time I was a Christian, and I remember I barely understood my Bible even after studying it. And now I'm back to Jesus, and I decided to do things different this time around, in the end, what I do need right now is to understand the word and not to become a theologist. Later on, I may get another translation, but this one is simple, challenging at times, but possible to comprehend for me. In my opinion, the translation isn't what really matter, the question is, do you understand what's being said so you can apply it? This is far from what is really important.
The NIV is more problematic than one might think. I too had stuck with it until 1999, when I found some of its problems, like omitting certain words and even verses, as a dynamic equivalence (thought-for-thought rather than word-for-word) translation. One of its worst omissions concerns John 7:8, in which Jesus says, "I go not up yet unto this feast." Here, the NIV omits "yet" (Koine Gk. 'oupo'), making Him look mistaken or lying, for He actually did attend the feast (v. 10).
@@ramoth777 Well, mine is NIV bible (In my native language, portuguese) And there is no such mistake in my NIV. But there is no perfect translation anyways. So it's no need to just throw away such a good translation for a possible mistake, I can keep others translations with me. NIV continues being my favorite one :)
@@nori_tutorExactly! Some people are just being ridiculous. English is my only language, and I've always loved the NIV version. I feel it's best to just ignore people who think they know it all when it comes to translations.
I was in jail and said Jesus please get me a bible so that I may get to know you as do so many of us who get into trouble. nav is what was brought to me it is a awsome tranlation
For all the people who are saying that modern translations don't include certain verses, do your research. The KJV ADDED these in. They were originally footnotes from old manuscripts that were so common that they decided to just add them. In the newer translations they didn't add them becsuse they aren't in the original documents! And most modern translations have a foot note added with what the KJV and others have added.
The KJV has no copyright, and is the only version translated from the Textus Recepticus via Antioch, by over 40 linguistic scholars at a time when the English language was at its peak.
I personally think that we should have at least 2 translations there isn't a perfect one using more than one is helping to get to deeper meaning. I personally use 4 when studying
I don't have a problem with people choosing to use the KJV or even preferring it. If they like it and they understand what it is saying, great. But there is a problem when people, through ignorance, insist that the KJV and ONLY the KJV is God's word. The KJV didn't even exist until 1611, so are those people saying that God's written word didn't exist until 1611? The original manuscripts were written in Hebrew, in Aramaic, and in Greek because those were the languages spoken by the people who were writing them. The KJV is NOT and has NEVER BEEN the one single God-ordained and God-approved translation of those manuscripts. The KJV was translated from those ancient manuscripts into the language of the day in 1611 just as modern versions are translated from those manuscripts into the language of our day. Yes, it is crucial that any translation be accurate, but that is true across the board, even with the KJV. In spite of what some people think, Jesus did not speak in King James English to His disciples. Here's a simple example: If someone wrote me a letter and mentioned "pot" in that letter, it would be crucial that I knew what he meant by "pot". It is one thing to tell someone not to use marijuana. It is something entirely different to tell someone not to use a large metal container. The language changes over time and so do some word meanings. There are many words commonly used in 1611 that aren't even part of our vocabulary today. To insist that Believers have to stumble through language they can't understand is to make a mockery of God's word in the first place. I have very little patience with ministers and churches who insist on KJV or nothing. It's more a revelation of their own ignorance and lack of understanding of God's word than it is anything else. If you understand and prefer the KJV, then by all means use it. If you best understand NAS, ESV, NIT, NLT, or any other accurate translation of the original manuscripts, then use them. Ultimately, unless you trust God to open His word and reveal its meaning to your heart, you are wasting your time anyway. Talk about straining at a gnat and swallowing a camel!!!
Any modern day fan of the sport of tennis can tell you what "let" means today... The meaning has never changed and it has not been "updated," simply because one of the word's meanings began to be used with higher frequency.
The four gospels cover the same time period. Because of that some have more details of events or skip some events/details. This alone doesn’t make them untrue and actually helps their credibility, why make four if all of them contain the same info no more or no less
You have to believe in a perfect Bible or else how do you know what’s being taught is true and I believe the KJV is the perfect word of God cause there’s evidence for it and also all these modern translations either shorten, lengthen or even take out verses, plus it started the great revival and it takes the word of God literal, you can’t trust scholars cause their man we can make mistakes but what we do is take what’s being taught and search to see if it’s true and the word scholar means to study something of interest the difference between the KJV and other translations is how to read the Bible 2 Tim. 2:15 the KJV says rightfully divide the word of truth other translations says handle and I’m not gonna let the scholars handle the word of God and teach wrong doctrines, cause in the Greek and Hebrew lexicons a word can have multiple means and your basically being bias of God and making it what you want it to mean rather then reading the scriptures as it and not changing the meaning
English is my 3rd language but I’m trying to learn KJV for study because my Bible in my own language based on NT copy ( critict text ) mostly equals to NASB, ESV. I don’t know why there’s so many missing translation in modern Bible. I don’t wanna debate over TR vs NT. I’m just grateful that i have both to complete each other.
There is a 'trinity' of salvation: so, I have been saved, I am (or am being saved) and I shall be saved. They're all true. The problem when you play semantics with scripture and try to understand it academically, is that you fail to hear The Holy Spirit, and you miss the message of God's love. 😏
The ASV is the closest to God's word? Frank, you went down a few notches on that one. Thanks, but I don't want close, I want perfect. I expect nothing less from our creator and Savior. The KJB is just that.
No one askes you to rewrite a letter when they don't understand the meaning of a word in the letter. No, you look it up or ask the writer what he meant. Simple Stuff. KJB is the perfect preserved word of God. Thank you, Lord.
These are "minor issues" he says? But God says EVERY word of God is pure. The point is God promised to preserve His word. Where is it today in 2021? I believe it is the KJB for English speaking people. If you don't believe this to be so, then where do you believe God's perfect word is, that He promised to preserve? B/c I believe God.
I completely disagree with this gentleman. The King James Version Is The Accurate English translation many Greek and Jewish scholars agree. They won't recommend other versions but the king James. Please people of God do your research. Don't believe every teacher on RUclips. Do your research, God Bless You ❤
Brother. The final authority is given to you by God. If we look to prove truth through a version of words, are the spirit of those same words being followed?
Jason Wright The deeper you study the more you see Jesus in the Old Testament, and prophecy all over the place. What's good about the KJV is that it causes you to dig deeper and study harder, finding out what certain words mean from their original language on your own. You can really feel the Holy Spirit during those deep study moments. The modern versions of the Bible have done the study for you, watering down that intimacy with the Word, and also changing the text altogether. A very percise and targeted deception to the body of Christ by the master deciever.
I have a question? Sorry I don't know all the terms and such but my question is this. So the Dead Sea scrolls have provided evidence of books missing in the or left out of the bible. Where are the scrolls for the books of the old and new testament?
The Dead Sea Scrolls provided manuscripts of the OT books, it did not add any "missing books". We know from Jewish writings what books they considered canon, so it is not a mystery. OT and NT manuscripts exist as papyrus fragments, parchments, scrolls and codexes. A good book to read on this is "From Texts to Translations" by Wagner.
The current Bible is full of contradictions. Jesus was not GOD, he was simply a prophet like all others prophets, you All Christians have been deceived. Wake Up!
I like the poetic flow of the King James, but it is not the best translation. It in itself is a revision of the Bishops Bible of 1558. However, in it's day it was the best they had. It was castigated when it first came out for being printed in vulgar language. Vulgar back then meant in the common, lest formal English of the day; not offensive language as we view the word today. The New American Standard is considered by most Biblical scholars to be the most accurate, but I still refer to the KJV from time to time. Most so-called translations today are "created" so as to make the Bible more readable for those whose education and reading level is limited. This is a good thing. The more the Scriptures can be read by everyone, the better.
*NO* ... If you want to learn 1611 English than read the KJV you will also need a 1611 dictionary. Another example: the word "worship" does not have the same connotations as it does today. If you want to learn and actually understand then the first thing you need is a desire for spiritual truth ... I suggest to pray for it! There are many false doctrines and false teachings thereby many false religions that want to hide and keep from accurate truth. To understand translations *(NOTE: translations are not inspired)* I recommend the Book "Truth in Translation" by Jason David Deduhn
Or....you could repent, be baptised and receive the Holy Spirit and KNOW you are saved. At that point the Holy Spirit will open your eyes and your understanding to the Scriptures. The simple Salvation message of God!
If the bible is the word of god, then why do people need to accept other peoples interpretations of other peoples translations of it? Doesnt that make the bible "mans word" instead of "gods word"?
Not only that, but the last time the KJV was updated was 1769, with the same language. Another issue is that the KJV is based on newer manuscripts that has 17 added verses(to be fair the KJV translators were using the best manuscripts they had at the time). The KJV is very beautifully written and a fine translation of you can understand it.
They are major issues that’s the point!! For instance the NIV leads out the divinity of Jesus in many verses. 99% truth is still lie. This is the first time I’ve disagreed with this man on stage
Why is it when there is an issue against the KJV they always make it a major issue, but when it's against the newer versions they always make it a minor issue? I'm not KJVO, but I've always noticed this.
There is no such thing as a King James Bible. A King James translation or Version, but not King James Bible. It's God's Bible, and only God's Bible!!! Stop putting a man's name on God's Holy Word!
There is a major issue of translation, which is the word "day" in Genesis. Notice that the meaning of the word day in this sentence does not mean 24 hours. : In Adam's "day" the word day has two meanings, like it has in our "day." In old Hebrew the word used here for the word day, rarely meant 24 hours, but could mean 24 hours, the most common usage is was that day=era not 24 hours. Check it out, "In the "day" you eat of the fruit of good and evil, you will die." Well after Adam ate the fruit, it goes on to say he lived to be more than 900 years old. Well that is one long day. The problem is that theologians who then want to insist that it is a 24 hour period of time are really just mistaken.
codices P66 P75 (both c. 175-225 CE) and 03 (c. 325-375 CE) contain ΟΥΠΟ (ουπω, not yet) at John 7:8, while the later codex 01 (c. 375-425 CE) has ΟΥΚ (ουκ, not) at that place.
To get the word of God right, you need to have the right word of God. Stick with the KJB. Words have changed meanings since the ASV has been written. That is a poor excuse to understand the KJB. On the average there are about 60 words added to the English dictionary monthly. Are you going to change the word of God ever month? Or even annually? That would be senseless. You don't change Shakespeare? (or maybe you do). If the KJB doesn't define the word in the context, cross references will define it most of the time. Something the new version don't even come close to, b/c they are not the word of God. Besides the new versions don't get rid of every supposedly difficult word. A few words the ASV uses: Seer maidens assuaged kine hocked fourscore smitten goodlier slew dearth the list goes on... no one uses these words much anymore. So don't read the ASV. Poor excuse not to use the KJB when the ASV also has antiquated words.
I would rather spend time on translation and old words if i am sure that is the oldest version in english. A Bible written today may "miss" a lot of marxism and PC trickling in. When im uncertain about anything in the Bible i look for discussions on the topic, how it was writen in hewbrew , etc.
Frank makes some good points about opposite meanings, but I have to go with the questioner on this. Seems like he's done his homework on this & knows what he's talking about.
@JuneAtHomePH The Bible translation issue is one of the most serious in our day! It is one area where I take issue with Frank. He believes that the originals were inspired, but that the copies & hence the translations are all up for grabs & that some translations are better than others but they all have their problems & none can be defended ultimately. I hold to a doctrine of inspiration & preservation. If God has not preserved His Word, we have no truly ultimate & final authority.
@JuneAtHomePH I understand his example with the archaic words in the KJV (I don't agree with his conclusion.) It can also be shown that clarity is an issue that is not solved by updating a version. The proliferation of translations on the market today does not help the situation. It adds to the confusion. As soon as they stop selling, there will be something to take their place. It's about money primarily & any other reasons are secondary. Publishers have a whole marketing plan they follow when they are coming out with a new translation. And most people like Frank either don't see it or don't care. I believe that Frank is sincere in what he confidence in the clip. But sincerity does not equal being right. He challenges the questioner on his position on the KJV & in doing so, reveals his own lack of confidence in it. (Most likely on purpose.) I personally can't figure out how someone who takes the position on the Scripture that Frank espouses here (& that is most of the modern teachers, preachers & scholars of today.) can do what they do when they don't believe they have a final authority they can lean on.
@JuneAtHomePH I am enjoying our conversations! I sense the presence of the Holy Spirit in them! I really love your comment here about the archaic words & what was passed down even before what we have received! I'm not sure I'd ever thought of it quite that way before! What we have in the KJV is there the way it is in order for us to stop & think about what we're reading.
@JuneAtHomePH Yes! I did know of Tyndale's last words. He is one of my heroes! Much of the Bible that Henry VIII allowed to be published was Tyndale's translation work that Henry wanted nothing to do with. God truly does work in mysterious ways! Your testimony concerning the KJV is truly a blessing & encouragement! Thank you for your boldness! Let's please keep in touch!
Here's the thing if nasb is the best version. Why does it have revisions? The easiest way to prove our bible version is correct is to check isa 14:12 if it blaspheme Jesus.. then it is the wrong version. KJV didn't blaspheme Jesus.
Just read the preface of the KJV, it’s called The Translators to the Reader... the translators themselves are all for updating translations. They never wanted anyone to deify the KJV
The King James Version Easy Read Bible is a very good option if you love KJV. It is the original KJV, but updates the old English archaic words to modern English words. It is abreviated KJVER. It has a list of every word that has been changed such as "you" for "thou"
No one askes you to rewrite a letter when they don't understand the meaning of a word in the letter. No, you look it up or ask the writer what he meant. Simple Stuff. KJB is the perfect preserved word of God. Thank you, Lord.
These are "minor issues" he says? But God says EVERY word of God is pure. The point is God promised to preserve His word. Where is it today in 2021? I believe it is the KJB for English speaking people. If someone doesn't believe this to be so, then where do they believe God's perfect word is, that He promised to preserve? They don't believe God can preserve His word for us today. I just believe God.
@@dkgrace6743 so what are you saying. Cause all bibles that have been translated contain some error or some changed meaning. I also believe the king james to be the best we have., but I myself have seen error in it, or seen something in it that shouldn't be there.
@@reynaldoperez7285 You didn't answer my comment as to where you think the perfectly preserved word of God is, that God promised would always be here, is. It can't be ALL of them, right? B/c most of them do not say or mean the same thing, even the opposites in many cases. And definitely not the same as the KJB. So, which is it? Where is God's word? Where is God's words? Thanks for your comment. Have a great week.
I choose the King James Version largely because of the poetic beauty of the language. I like to speak aloud when I read the Bible as to place the Word of God deeper into my mind, and so I prefer a translation that sounds beautiful, poetic, elegant, and authoritative when spoken. So many newer Bible translations today just sound so clunky and awkward when spoken aloud because the translators did not care much for making their translations sound poetic and beautiful.
Beauty is in the eye of the beholder. Also, our idea of beauty is influenced by what is familiar to us. I grew up with the KJV and find some verses in the Bible (like Ps. 23) more poetic or prettier than those verses in other translations. That being said, I am able to understand the gospel message better using other translations that are not written in Old English. Let me add that I rely on other translations that I have been told are accurate translations of the original text created long before the KJV or the other translation existed. I speak English as my first language. i met a guy that spoke German as his first language. He said to him English sounded clunky and awkward. To me German sounds clunky and awkward. Beauty is in the eye of the beholder. To really understand the meaning of the original word of God is beautiful, no matter which translation you read.
@@Aaron-dq3xz Because some people who use the KJV assert that the other translations created after the KJV are not accurate translations of the original texts. I am also triggered by Christians who think that speaking in tongues are signs of a true Christian, or that if you are not healed after praying for healing, you must not have enough faith; or if you suffer from misfortune, you must have been a sinner (See the Book of Job).
@@Aaron-dq3xz Do you consider ALL other translations than the KJV to be inaccurate, omit verses, entire passages and teach false doctrines?" Some like the Living Bible are less accurate and do not literally follow the original texts. The Living Bible loses accuracy in order to make it easier to read. I prefer more accurate translations. Some modern Bibles more faithfully follow the original scripture than the KJV, but interpret the original texts into language more easily understood in today's vernacular than the everyday English language of 1611. Do you somehow believe that the people who translated the KJV are more capable of accurately presenting the scriptures than Bible scholars today? Are they somehow more spiritual, more Christian, more intellegent than today's Bible scholars? If you do think that, thou are wrong. Today's scholars are at least as thorough in understanding and interpreting the literal meaning of those scriptures into today's vernacular as the KJV interpretors were into the language of those times.
O com'on guys salvation is a major doctrine! being save ?(niv)meaning you have to work for it vs kjv(you know you have eternal life its a done deal ) God does the saving
Frank is off base. New versions often use more difficult words. New versions have many words missing. Verses missing. Many errors. New versions also use archaic words. Jesus said man shall not live by bread alone but by every word of God. So, where are the every words of God?
Good question. How many languages was the bible written in? Hebrew, Greek and a very little Aramaic. What did people do who didn't understand those languages? They still needed to know God. They had to go to the Jew's to know God in the OT. (Gen - Acts 8...)
King James is where to go my total humble opinion
Gary Bartell The deeper you study the more you see Jesus in the Old Testament, and prophecy all over the place. What's good about the KJV is that it causes you to dig deeper and study harder, finding out what certain words mean from their original language on your own. You can really feel the Holy Spirit during those deep study moments. The modern versions of the Bible have done the study for you, watering down that intimacy with the Word, and also changing the text altogether. A very percise and targeted deception to the body of Christ by the master deciever.
@V Max which verses were changed? I just downloaded a Geneva1599. I looked at some key scripture that are very important in my opinion, and in context of salvation. They say the same thing the KJV does. Except with old English writing
Example
GNV
16For God so loued the worlde, that hee hath giuen his onely begotten Sonne, that whosoeuer beleeueth in him, should not perish, but haue euerlasting life.
For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life.
Nah CSB is best
I respect you opinion, but...Interpreting the original texts and translating it into the language that everyday people can understand is the best in my opinion, humble or not. If we want to spread the gospel it is especially true for non-Christians unfamiliar with 16th Century vernacular. Start throwing thees and thous at them and they think of the pilgrims, not Jesus. Jesus conveyed God's message to the people using parables about things they were familiar with, like sheep, water, bread, coins, rain and wind. People today do not understand 16th Century language as well as they did in the 16th Century. However, the KJV is beautiful and lyrical, and many of my favorite passages in the Bible sound more familiar to me in the KJV, because I grew up with that. I used to read books by classical authors as a child, but it took me a while to translate their archaic terminology into my ordinary thought processes. I know, because the Bible scholars tell me, that there are accurate translations of the original scripture into modern language. With all the translations available today, why not do your own research into which translations are considered by Bible scholars to be accurate? Look at all of them for a particular verse to gain a better understanding of it. We don't have to choose sides. Jesus came for all who believe; the devil wants to sow disunity among us. Humans have a tendency to want to split up over nonessential issues.
History is a chronological record of events, often including an explanation of, or commentary on, those events. The Bible is the sacred book of Christianity, written by more than 40 authors, inspired by God, over a period of 1,500 years. The original Bible was communicated in Hebrews, Greek and Aramaic by men inspired by God to communicate to man what God wanted to communicate to men. Men devoted to God have over the years studied copies of the original text of the Bible and translated the Hebrews, Greek and Aramaic into the language of their day. I believe the men who wrote the KJV, Geneva Bible and many other translations based their translations on their understanding of the original text, in order to make clear the meaning of the original text to the people of their day. They prayed to God that He would guide them to accurately translate his Word so that people would understand. I am glad that they did. God bless them. I am glad I don't have to learn Hebrews, Greek and Aramaic. I am glad that God is a God that wants His people to know His Word and will make sure that we have accurate translations in a vernacular that we can understand. I am also glad that He has given us the intelligence to understand when someone is not interested in knowing and presenting God's Word, but is interested in promoting a false doctrine or diverting us from seeking to know God's Word.
If you take the time with the King James old English it comes just as naturally as modern. Problem is we live in a society where putting your own effort into something is too hard and it should be left to others, so we get all these translations in the end. Give the KJV a chance it’s a beautiful book.
Shannon Keys but it's pointless. I don't speak that language. I'd rather read a language I'm familiar with. Might as well learn Greek if your going to do that. Some of you act as if Paul and Luke wrote in Elizabetheon English. Geez, it's a translation....get over it!
Nice Shannon.
Watch this 20 mins.
KJB is God’s word.
ruclips.net/video/qaVWgewj1Ts/видео.html
Shannon Keys , King James Bible is not Old English.
Wayne Lawson I’m sure there is another term but my point still stands. It is old and it is English 😂
David Mosteller it’s a variation of English not a completely different language like Greek your making my point it’s not that hard.
My first English Bible is the KJV, but english my 3rd language, its really hard sometimes for me to understand the old english, so i bought ESV and NASB. Now i understand them both better. Holy Spirit will guide you to the truth. GOD Bless us all.
The Good Samaritan, it is not Old English.
You cannot understand the KJV Bible better by using other Bible perversions. It will truly give you wrong answers.
I don't know how its called but I'm better off using the 3 version. If only I could understand Greek, ill read Greek.
The Good Samaritan The deeper you study the more you see Jesus in the Old Testament, and prophecy all over the place. What's good about the KJV is that it causes you to dig deeper and study harder, finding out what certain words mean from their original language on your own. You can really feel the Holy Spirit during those deep study moments. The modern versions of the Bible have done the study for you, watering down that intimacy with the Word, and also changing the text altogether. A very percise and targeted deception to the body of Christ by the master deciever.
Exactly. Well said.
I still use my KJV. The "let" example isn't hard to figure out. I like using a Strongs concordance alongside and engage in deep study, figuring the translation myself. I just feel much fuller and throughly fed.
Likewise. Love the beauty of the language. A translation may be off here or there, but beauty is important alongside of precision.
Bible Illustrated Exactly. Since I was a child I always pray before I read/study, asking God by His Spirit to help me get a clear understanding of His Word. Over the years it's become easier to perceive. The deeper you study the more you see Jesus in the Old Testament, and prophecy all over the place. What's good about the KJV is that it causes you to dig deeper and study harder, finding out what certain words mean from their original language on your own. You can really feel the Holy Spirit during those deep study moments. The modern versions of the Bible have done the study for you, watering down that intimacy with the Word, and also changing the text altogether. A very percise and targeted deception to the body of Christ by the master deciever. Sorry for the long story and the late response.
Amen Reggie.
G.A. Riplinger has a book coming out in June,
The dictionary inside the King James Bible.
God bless you brother in Christ.
My walk with the Lord has actually been thrown off because all the debates on translations. I didn't grow up in the church but when I did go to church as a young kid I remember specifically using the KJV so I just figured that was the one and only translation, so when I got saved 8 years ago I started using a KJV, it wasn't until later I realized there were multiple translations which I began to seek out and it began to confuse me. So currently I'm still back and forth between the KJV and ESV but I prefer the KJV over all. It just seems right to me.
Sean Savage Check this out ➡️➡️ruclips.net/video/FAgDXZfOfx0/видео.html
This should be an argument IN the church among coffee, not in front of the unbelievers.
Radical4Christ Why should it be in front of people who believe?
@@braydenshanley7435They're making the argument that this discussion _should not_ be in front of non-believers because it can give them a sense of disorganization--for lack of a better word.
It's similar to how people say parents should never argue in front of their children.
I am a KJVer, but I currently recommend the CSB to people who have never read the Bible before. When I'm quoting the Bible *to* someone, though, I use the KJV because I can translate it and explain the meaning/passage to them.
The point is to remove as many obstacles as possible to encourage people to dive into the Word of God of their own will.
Lawrence Fitzgerald So non believers are children? Also how is the Bible the “word” of God? Even in the Bible it claims that is is divinely inspired.
@@braydenshanley7435
Seeing how you attempted to twist words in your response to the OP--and your response to me--it appears that you are simply trolling.
Start with 2 Timothy 3:16 about the Word of God.
For the rest of your comments, I'll leave you with these parting words:
Proverbs 1:7 (KJV)
"The fear of the LORD is the beginning of knowledge: but fools despise wisdom and instruction."
Proverbs 29:9 (KJV)
"If a wise man contendeth with a foolish man, whether he rage or laugh, there is no rest."
May God open your eyes and bless you.
Lawrence Fitzgerald Amen brother. God’s speed🙏
Thanks Frank. I look fwd to notifications of your video's, which are not only interesting, but as someone who debates various Atheists and Muslims online; I am now learning how to tackle some of the tougher questions about our Christian faith through your Q&A style videos... questions that are not always black and white, but which you tend to explain in laymans terms, yet without excluding the historicity behind why we believe what we do as Christians. Helpful!
God bless you Frank.
That is the point: These differences and nuanced textual variations are minor and in no way discredit the essential truths of God's word.
I admire believers who really want the purest available version of the Scriptures, it truly is the best of motives. I’m not sure why it seems impossible for some to believe that God is unwilling or incapable or not interested in preserving His Word accurately beyond 1611.
This comment is confusing. Are you for the KJV only or are you saying that other versions are alright to use? I think you messed up on your wording in that last sentence but I could be wrong.
@@tylert5096 Paraphrase: KJV only believers think that the 1611 English King James Version is the only accurate English translation of the Scriptures.
If that was the case it would imply that God has decided (for some reason) that He is not going to preserve His Word through any other English translation for the last 410 years and counting.
I don't understand that idea because it seems like God has gone through great pains to make His Word available to nearly every nation in every generation in order that more people might know and follow Him.
Sorry that the first comment was not clear. Hope that helps.
@@vincer7824 The word of God is pure and stands strong and incorruptible. Why would he change it?
Proverbs 30:5-6 KJV
[5] Every word of God is pure: he is a shield unto them that put their trust in him. [6] Add thou not unto his words, lest he reprove thee, and thou be found a liar.
Psalm 12:6-7 KJV
[6] The words of the Lord are pure words: as silver tried in a furnace of earth, purified seven times. [7] Thou shalt keep them, O Lord, thou shalt preserve them from this generation for ever.
God knows what he’s doing, we don’t need to question his authority. Not like the devil does.
Genesis 3:1 KJV
[1] Now the serpent was more subtil than any beast of the field which the Lord God had made. And he said unto the woman, Yea, hath God said, Ye shall not eat of every tree of the garden?
Scholarship is good if your defending God, but if your questioning His authority you cause lots of confusion. The translation of the KJV was given by inspiration of God and its publication was, since it has sold 6 billion copies.
@@vincer7824 Ill have you know brother that modern versions chop up verses, remove them entirely, and take out chapters. They are different. As well as the greek texts they are based on. In the end, its authority of man vs. The one book that has proven itself for 400 years to be the monarch of books, the word of God without the simple errors all other translations get into funk with (who killed Goliath, Jesus and Satan are the morning star, etc.)
@@elijahj9902they don't do that, they remove the footnotes that the KJV added as Scripture.
King James 1611 all day every day!!!
JK 1611 funny thing is people will say the ESV NIV et cetera are easier to read. That may be true that they are easier to read but they are harder to understand. It took me a long time to realize salvation is a free gift and you only need to receive it once and you don’t have to do anything for it NOTHING but understand believe and accept it (faith). Now all these other versions are secretly (and sometimes more obviously) works based. You can’t work your way into heaven your works are as filthy rags for your salvation. Also the NIV calls Jesus Satan look it up. That’s a terrible translation if you ask me. The KJV is the only version that calls Lucifer by his name.
Latent Tweet I would still argue that the English language is far to simple to explain true meaning of what the Bible is trying to portray as we use one word for things that have many different meanings in Greek and Hebrew. For example, there are many different words for love in Greek and in the English version they are all grouped into one word “love”.
JDrocks4ever yes I use that analogy a lot on the different types of love. Greek and Hebrew are pretty cool because one verb alone can have a gender or case that it’s conjugated into that tells a lot more than what English does. Maybe that’s why these languages were the most used for bible translations. However I also found that some people don’t like what the Bible says in English so they try to make it say something different by using Greek and Hebrew. Look at pastor Steven Anderson’s recent documentary on Cyprus where he reads koine Greek to modern Greek speakers it talks a lot about this subject. The best analogy I use for Greek Hebrew and English is like watching a football game on and old CRT tv. In the end you know who won and who lost. You saw a fumble. But Greek and Hebrew is like watching the game in 8K high def, where you can see the replay of the guys glove that had sweat drops on it that caused the fumble. (I don’t watch football so I’m making this up but you get the point.)
Either way one has more clarity but they both have the gospel of Jesus Christ. Some countries the Bible is banned and people may only hear the gospel through other people that memorized it or are paraphrasing it.
@@latenttweet I definitely agree. The KJV is a great version and the NIV is kinda an antichrist version in my opinion because of the reasons you stated and it removes important details that makes it less powerful. The main objective is coming to the knowledge of the truth and salvation. Studying the Greek, Hebrew, and Aramaic translations helps to give us more profound insight that has great use in teaching. The Bible is awesome man!
@@JDrocks4ever AMEN brother.
NIV: Man does not live by bread alone.
KJV: Man does not live by bread alone, but by every word of God.
what's that verse about adding or removing from the books? ;)
I am currently studying greek and Hebrew and so far it has been a real blessing and helped me to convey the word even better even to English speakers!
If the KJV is the standard, then nobody had the Bible until 1611. The Bible was written in Hebrew, Aramaic and Greek, not Elizabethan English.
KJV is a direct translation of the original Hebrew & Greek text. It is the English standard of all English Bible. Anyone who attacks the KJV aren't true Christians for the KJV is the written Word of God.
@@GplusGains what about ncv, niv, nkjv, nlt, etc?
@@PapaSeed You being serious or just trying to waste my time? If the former, I'll give you my two cents with references.
GplusGains even the KJV is NOT translated word for word. It’s not about it being completely accurate because that can never be. It’s about getting the meaning of it across.
@@cr7069 I said it's a direct translation from the original Hebrew and Greek. Some books are translated from a book that's been translated from the original source. In any translation, word for word translation is impossible. I hope this clears up your misunderstanding.
NKJV and KJV is what I prefer. I've heard some say that without KJV you can't be saved. The early church didn't even have a Bible, and they were saved. There are Christians in Brazil who speak Portuguese, and they don't read the KJV. Revelation 7:9 says there will be all nations, tribes, peoples, and tongues worshipping the Lamb. I love both my KJV and NKJV, but they are not the way to Heaven, faith in Jesus Christ, and His death, burial, and resurrection for us is. (1 Corinthians 15:1-4)
We need more KJV people like you. It is undoubtedly a very good translation, but all the militant KJV only people give it a bad reputation.
Great questions- stick with the timeless King James Bible and you’ll never go wrong!
Sons of Thunder Baptist The deeper you study the more you see Jesus in the Old Testament, and prophecy all over the place. What's good about the KJV is that it causes you to dig deeper and study harder, finding out what certain words mean from their original language on your own. You can really feel the Holy Spirit during those deep study moments. The modern versions of the Bible have done the study for you, watering down that intimacy with the Word, and also changing the text altogether. A very percise and targeted deception to the body of Christ by the master deciever.
@@reggiejohnson3391 Basically what you're saying is you often have a hard time understanding the King James, so you study deeper into the Greek wording by yourself, to try to understand better what the book is saying. The satisfaction your feeling above all other translations is the fact you're not sure you understand it, and by digging deeper yourself, you're slowly learning Greek, and words from the original bible language. Which IS, what bible translations are doing today. I'm not saying EVERY bible translation is good, I'm saying there are VERY respectable translations out there, equal to, or better than the KJV in modern English. It's just fact. If I told you the Geneva Bible had authority over King James because it was first, and any differences the two bibles had were solved by using the Geneva Bible only, and the KJV is corrupting God's word, would you believe me? And why not? I could say the enemy deceived mankind for 400 years. How is that any different than what you're saying? We look at MANUSCRIPTS. We need to give more credit to modern translations, because there are God's people leading us into truth, JUST as the Geneva bible translators and King James Translators did. If you don't understand how language evolves, modern languages for modern people, then I'm not sure you understand translation at all. If you believe Satan took over God's word after 1611, then I suppose you're free to believe what you please,
Kyle Surette I really wish I could like this comment more than once.
@@KyleSurette13
There are entire websites that break down the many ways the Alexandria based translations have not only removed the deity from Jesus--but have also equated Jesus to Satan.
Do what I did: pray to God to open your eyes, mind and heart to the truth...and really mean it. I guarantee you, God Will reveal the truth to you.
I have yet to find an English translation more faithful to God and Jesus Christ than the KJV.
@@vincer7824 I am 100% with you on that!
The KJV upholds the Deity of Christ in I Tim. 3:16:
KJV: "... God was manifest in the flesh..."
ESV: "... He was manifested in the flesh..."
NASV: "... He who was revealed in the flesh..."
NIV: "... He appeared in a body..."
Gary Gothlin The deeper you study the more you see Jesus in the Old Testament, and prophecy all over the place. What's good about the KJV is that it causes you to dig deeper and study harder, finding out what certain words mean from their original language on your own. You can really feel the Holy Spirit during those deep study moments. The modern versions of the Bible have done the study for you, watering down that intimacy with the Word, and also changing the text altogether. A very percise and targeted deception to the body of Christ by the master deciever.
The question has never been and should never be which translation we like best or feels most comfortable to us. It should be which translation is the closest and most accurate translation of what was written in the original manuscripts by the original writers.
1 Timothy 3:16 (ESV) says "Great indeed, we confess, is the mystery of Godliness: He was manifested in the flesh, vindicated by the Spirit, seen by angels, proclaimed among the nations, believed on in the world, taken up in glory."
There is no confusion, lack or clarity, or any misinterpretation there. KJV doesn't even mention Jesus by name---you are inferring that from the context and the surrounding verses. Of course this is speaking of Jesus, and when it refers to the mystery of Godliness and describes Him this way, of course it is upholding and proclaiming His deity. The other versions do the same.
I have no quarrel with the KJV or your preference for it, but it unreasonable and simply untrue to say that it is the only "correct" or "real" version of God's word.
ruclips.net/video/wXo77YLc6XA/видео.html
The NIV says, "He appeared in the flesh", not "He appeared in a body"
They are all saying the same thing. The verse is talking about Jesus, and Jesus is who? God. This is something you should by default gather AS you read, its not an extra step.
Though if a Bible is actually removing parts then be careful, but anyone should be asking God what Bible versions to read, study, and memorize from. They are not to decide, He is.
I found this from chick tracts. you will have to go to the web site to see the parts it would not paste in.
© 2001 by David W. Daniels
Question: Which is correct in 1 Timothy 3:16, "God was manifest in the flesh" (KJV) or "He appeared in a body" (NIV)?
Answer: Without a doubt, the Scripture says, "God was manifest in the flesh." The vast testimony of history shows us clearly that the word in question is "God," not "he" or "who." But the Alexandrian lie ended up even in the Roman Catholic Vulgate and all modern perversions. Here's how easy it was.
In Greek, the word for God was abbreviated, like this:
But the word "who" (which the NIV called "he") was written like this:
The difference between "God" and "who" in Greek was a little line. The amazing thing is, by the Alexandrians removing a line from one letter, they took away the deity of Christ!
The overwhelming testimony of history is that God preserved His words. In thousands of manuscripts, God preserved these words, "God was manifest in the flesh." Though the Roman Catholic religion preserved the perversion of the Alexandrians, and every Alexandrian translation tries to hide it, it is still true: God was manifest in the flesh.
And you will always find truths like this, when you read the King James Bible.
I read king james first , then if I dont understand I read other versions but all of them have helped me grow closer to God. If something doesn't read or sound right pray and ask God.
Textus Receptus all the way! If it is not the Textus Receptus, then don’t use it, you will be misled.
Bors de Ganys Exactly. The deeper you study the more you see Jesus in the Old Testament, and prophecy all over the place. What's good about the KJV is that it causes you to dig deeper and study harder, finding out what certain words mean from their original language on your own. You can really feel the Holy Spirit during those deep study moments. The modern versions of the Bible have done the study for you, watering down that intimacy with the Word, and also changing the text altogether. A very percise and targeted deception to the body of Christ by the master deciever.
We are King James bible BELIEVERS not apologists treating God's word as any other book written by men. You either believe God preserved His word or you do not. You will never be able to prove where God's word is just as you cannot prove that God exists. Hebrews 11:6
“But without faith it is impossible to please him: for he that cometh to God must believe that he is, and that he is a rewarder of them that diligently seek him.” God's ways are not our ways and who will tell Him how He should move? God has preserved His word- you either believe it or you make up your own word. It is not a matter of academics or preferences but of FAITH.
Why does God's Word have to be preserved in English? Why can't it be preserved in the original Greek and Hebrew. KJV-onlyism is just plain Anglo-centric.
Hello Chow, do you read Hebrew and Greek? And just like God chose Hebrew and Greek for the originals (which do NOT exist since the first century) why can He not choose another language for His complete and perfect word. Especially since in His foreknowledge He knew English would be the most widely used language for the end times. And God is not Anglo-centric- there were bibles in other languages before the KJB (Syriac, Latin, German, French to name a few) but the final purified word is the King James Authorized bible.
If by not exists you mean that Hebrew and English have evolved into their modern forms, then I agree. However, that also means that the KJV English also "does not exists" as it is different from modern English. English is just another language that the Bible was translated into. I do not deny it's importance in today's world but to elevate it as you have is ludicrous.
I believe God preserved His word just as you do. The difference is that Jesus Christ is the one and only TRUE word of God. Everything else we have is a written recording of what God did and said. Yes, He inspired the writers and they wrote what He told them to. The issue is not whether God's word has been preserved---the issue is clarity for the reader. We are told to rightly divide the word of truth.
Chow, I am not elevating a language but a book written in that language. Was God elevating Hebrew in the Old Testament or Greek for the New Testament? No, He does as He pleases and who are we to object.
King James is the best way to go. Watch the documentary a lamp in the dark
KevinDrakeFitness good look ty
You want to argue with Frank Turek. Good luck
Agreed, one can also look at the documentary "New world order bible versions", side by side comparison and honest discussion with dissenting arguments.
Why are there so many Bible Translations? Money, the kjv is the only Bible you can print without owing soneone a royalty. You can change any Bible by 10% and have your own Bible Version. How accurate is anything if it is changed by 10%???
It's not!
Why assume that 400 years of manuscript research wouldn't result in more accurate readings?
There are many Bible translations because there are believers devoted to God, who want to obey him and take the Gospel message to as many people as possible.
Many versions give the impression Jesus lies to His brothers in John 7:8 by leaving the word "yet" out. In the KJV Jesus says, "I go not up yet unto this feast". If Jesus is our Holy Saviour He must always be Holy, dishonesty is unholy.
Scribes frequently added words to make a text make more sense or to correct problematic statements. It's not about which reading makes more sense, it's about which reading is more accurate to the original text.
@Bryan Jacobs Early codices P66 P75 (both c. 175-225 CE) and 03 (c. 325-375 CE) contain ΟΥΠΟ (ουπω, not yet) at John 7:8, while the later codex 01 (c. 375-425 CE) has ΟΥΚ (ουκ, not) at that place. So the original had “yet”, so that means the scribes erase the “yet” word.
You can always misinterpret the Bible. Your inability to pick up a dictionary isn't an excuse. KJV is the Bible.
Technically "let" means "prevent" TODAY in Tennis. Not to mention context is key.
Nice devil fingers...
The ONLY version of the bible under constant attack/criticism is the King James Version. When I was born again, I had no idea which version to read so I prayed that God would help me. I was given 4 different bibles and I read the first line of each and rejected them. I "knew" they weren't right. The KJV was like finally coming home after a long and arduous journey. I LOVE my bible, it's beautiful and wonderful and the TRUTH.
KJV is not the best translation out there, but (for English language) it historically the most important and it is definitely one of the most beautiful. I got one during my trip to New York, and it is a beautiful edition of a beautiful translation.
Bible Illustrated The deeper you study the more you see Jesus in the Old Testament, and prophecy all over the place. What's good about the KJV is that it causes you to dig deeper and study harder, finding out what certain words mean from their original language on your own. You can really feel the Holy Spirit during those deep study moments. The modern versions of the Bible have done the study for you, watering down that intimacy with the Word, and also changing the text altogether. A very percise and targeted deception to the body of Christ by the master deciever.
Don’t just stick to one translation. And look into the original interpretation as much as possible. With the resources we have at our finger tips it’s not that hard to study for yourself.It’s that simple!
Yeah basically, whenever I see something I really don't know about I sometimes consider checking out the other versions
The NASB translation is the most literal according to the Critical Text... If a person does not recognize the Critical Text as the most reliable text, the conclusion could be drawn that the NASB IS not the most accurate. Additionally, earlier manuscripts that are found does not automatically imply accuracy...
We currently have asimilar situation in our country (Philippines) where a new "taglish" (filipino-english) version just recently this month that uses slangs from both languages and a lot of Christians from different denominations find skeptical and caused a lot of outrage apparently due to how the language is being used to translate the Bible.
I'm curious if this insight would explain it?
Is this the Pinoy Version wherein some modern street words are used?
@@jheyb03 Yep.
I think that was based on Koine Greek wherein that's the language spoken at the time of Jesus. In Filipino, "salitang kalye". That's why, Pinoy version is based on Koine Greek. I don't know the whole idea. That's just what I heard 😅
@@jheyb03 That's pretty cool if that's the case, haha
No matter the version one may use, consider this, the the Bible is a message given to the people of God. Any understanding must be gained by the help of the Holy Spirit. He is our teacher, and he takes the things of Christ and shows them unto us.
There are teachers in colleges and churches and seminaries that have not the Spirit, and teaching those who are like unto themselves. These having not the Spirit are carnal in their understanding, no matter their knowledge of Greek and Hebrew and historical knowledge of world religions.
They know not the Spirit, he is not with them, neither is he in them. The word of God is spiritual and grace is required for spiritual understanding. Peace on earth and good will towards men.
No one askes you to rewrite a letter when they don't understand the meaning of a word in the letter. No, you look it up or ask the writer what he meant. Simple Stuff. KJB is the perfect preserved word of God. Thank you, Lord.
These are "minor issues" he says? But God says EVERY word of God is pure.
The point is God promised to preserve His word. Where is it today in 2021?
I believe it is the KJB for English speaking people. If you don't believe this to be so, then where do you believe God's perfect word is, that He promised to preserve? B/c I believe God.
The NASB is NOT the most accurate. There are tons of contradictions in it such as Galatians 3:16 and Genesis 12:7. These 2 scriptures nullify the other in the NASB. The KJV however has it translated exactly the way it was written.
Dost thee believeth thatith the priesteth in the 16ith centuryith were giftedith inith interpretingith Hebrewith, Greekith and Amarameicith moreith faithfullyith thanith theseith 21stith centuryith scholarsith?
You show your ignorance of why the "thee's" and "ye's" are needed to be there to understand the context properly.
To answer your question: Yes, absolutely.
There is a reason it's called the King James VERSION, it came from another source so it's not original!
2 Thessalonians 2:3 & 2:7 use the word "let". Does anyone understand what Frank said "we would get a wrong interpretation today since "let" had a different meaning in 1611???
I’ve hear it said that the best translation of the Bible is a READ one!
Another is the best translation of the Bible is ALL (not any) of them.
By that I mean if you will consult a word for word, a thought for thought (dynamic equivalent) and another that tries to blend these two approaches together you will see how each approach contributes to our understanding of Scripture. My favorite approach is using Blue Letter Bible to arrange all of the translations I consult by I ordering them from the top: “word for word” (NASV), a blend (NIV) to thought for thought (New Living Translation). The more (up to a point) the better on really difficult to translate passages. The New English Translation (NET) full translator notes edition can allow you to see the translators pros and cons notes of translation. Hope that helps.
You can either read the word of God (KJV) or the lies of satan (everything else)... your choice.
If you are too lazy to learn King James English... then enjoy being utterly confused with no assurance of any of the authorities of God 👍
Right! No one askes you to rewrite a letter when they don't understand the meaning of a word in the letter. No, you look it up or ask the writer what he meant. Simple Stuff. KJB s the perfect preserved word of God. Thank you, Lord.
These are "minor issues" he says? But God says EVERY word of God is pure.
The point is God promised to preserve His word. Where is it today in 2021?
I believe it is the KJB for English.
Frank says there are no major issues with the newer translations. I'm going to show just one which should completely dispel that view. In the NASB, in Acts 4:28, "predestined" is used where the KJV uses "determined". If you read the passage, the NASB is saying that God predestined the evil acts of those who crucified Jesus. That would make God a sinner if the NASB is correctly translated.
God is Sovereign.“I am God, and there is no other; I am God, and there is none like me...I say: 'My purpose will stand, and I will do all that I please'” (Isaiah 46:9-10).
Christopher McFall But isn't that greek word translated as predestined in the NASB in Acts 4:28 translated as predestined in other passages in the KJV?
How can we be saved if Jesus is never sacrificed? God is above all. He is not to be crammed into the parameters YOU give him.
No English translation is the perfect Word. Because it's obviously not Aramaic, Hebrew or the koine Greek. We must study across translations - preferably texts based off thousands of manuscripts not the handful KJV is.
Sean R. The only time the KJV uses predestinated is where it talks about Gods elect. What I know about greek is that context and sentence structure has a big bearing on what way it is translated to english. The video is about english translations. I'm showing where the new, supposedly better translations have got it wrong. Determined and predestined mean different things in english. And that's only one of a ton of examples.
Robert Contreras. No mistakes or contradictions in the KJV. Tons in the other, vatican inspired and endorsed versions from corrupt manuscripts. If you don't believe God preserved his word, what are you reading?
The point about "predestined vs determined" is in the english meanings. If God predestined the crucifixion, then he caused men to sin, making him a sinner. Do you see the point being made?
If you truly desire the REAL Biblical texts, Tell the Vatican to release them ALL. Whom do you believe put "King James into power" ? Who and what was the "Great inquisition " when did it stop and what transpired at that relative time? If you believe that any of our Bibles are true and not tainted , then you are lost... Seek ye the Holy Spirit and pray pray pray on this!
"King James English" was never used as common language, ever. Even though the words may have changed in meaning, it is lazy not to seek for the meaning of them as they were written, just lazy. If the translators of any version had been that lazy we would never have had the Bible in the English language.
Things that are different, are not the same. Even the "modern" translations from the "older" manuscripts don't agree with one another. They say different thing, therefore they cannot be the same and if they say different things they cannot all be the Word of God unless you believe in relativism. They say different things and remove so many vital words and create so much vagueness. Many of the people that defend the "modern" translations are viewing these with a foreknowledge of the truth they already know from their previous use of the King James version, they see the verses with the missing words because they are already in their mind.
Another thing to consider is that the "older" a text is doesn't necessarily determine it's authenticity. The number of manuscripts that have been complied that agree with those used by the translators of the KJB are far more than the few used in the "modern" versions. The manuscripts used by Wescott and Hort to compile what these "modern" translations all use don't even all agree with each other. They were also "lost" for centuries until Wescott and Hort "found" them, which means from the second century until they were "rediscovered" the true Word of God was not being used. Throughout that time the letters that the churches were sending back and forth had scripture exactly as the KJB translated it, not as the modern translations have written them. This being the case, Psalm 12:6-7 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" must not be true? No, God has preserved His word and we have it.
I admire the young man defending the KJV.
That last line is the most important. There are differences in the translations, and there are actual differences in the texts! We must embrace the minor contradictions as proof of the accounts authenticity. A police officer will tell you if four separate stories match perfectly, every detail, then the story is most likely a lie, because no two people see EXACTLY the same thing.
That's the problem with saying the entire bible is "the word of God" instead of saying that the bible CONTAINS "the word of God." In 1st Corinthians 7:25 Paul says that what follows is NOT the word of God, but is the opinion of a trustworthy servant. If Paul lived today and we told him that what HE said in that verse is now considered "the word of God", Paul would slap us upside the head.
Contradictions is authenticity in 2018?
Isn't God suppose to be the one inspiring these men? If so? How can there be contradictions? You Christians are going out of your way to sound dumb
I’m reading the NKJV
I find it great
For what I see, the King James translation is truly one of the best we have. But as a new Christian, I'm so happy with my NIV. I struggled A LOT the first time I was a Christian, and I remember I barely understood my Bible even after studying it. And now I'm back to Jesus, and I decided to do things different this time around, in the end, what I do need right now is to understand the word and not to become a theologist. Later on, I may get another translation, but this one is simple, challenging at times, but possible to comprehend for me. In my opinion, the translation isn't what really matter, the question is, do you understand what's being said so you can apply it? This is far from what is really important.
The NIV is more problematic than one might think. I too had stuck with it until 1999, when I found some of its problems, like omitting certain words and even verses, as a dynamic equivalence (thought-for-thought rather than word-for-word) translation. One of its worst omissions concerns John 7:8, in which Jesus says, "I go not up yet unto this feast." Here, the NIV omits "yet" (Koine Gk. 'oupo'), making Him look mistaken or lying, for He actually did attend the feast (v. 10).
@@ramoth777 Well, mine is NIV bible (In my native language, portuguese) And there is no such mistake in my NIV. But there is no perfect translation anyways. So it's no need to just throw away such a good translation for a possible mistake, I can keep others translations with me. NIV continues being my favorite one :)
@@nori_tutorExactly! Some people are just being ridiculous. English is my only language, and I've always loved the NIV version. I feel it's best to just ignore people who think they know it all when it comes to translations.
@@beadoll8025 Indeed, NIV ♥️
I was in jail and said Jesus please get me a bible so that I may get to know you as do so many of us who get into trouble. nav is what was brought to me it is a awsome tranlation
For all the people who are saying that modern translations don't include certain verses, do your research. The KJV ADDED these in. They were originally footnotes from old manuscripts that were so common that they decided to just add them. In the newer translations they didn't add them becsuse they aren't in the original documents! And most modern translations have a foot note added with what the KJV and others have added.
I John 5:7 debate live on April 20th, Standing for Truth Ministries hosting 8pm est.
Just carry your main bible translation on you and get an APP on your phone for every single other translation. Cant go wrong lol
The KJV has no copyright, and is the only version translated from the Textus Recepticus via Antioch, by over 40 linguistic scholars at a time when the English language was at its peak.
I personally think that we should have at least 2 translations there isn't a perfect one using more than one is helping to get to deeper meaning. I personally use 4 when studying
I am a Independent fundamental King James Baptist and I’m proud of it.
I don't have a problem with people choosing to use the KJV or even preferring it. If they like it and they understand what it is saying, great. But there is a problem when people, through ignorance, insist that the KJV and ONLY the KJV is God's word. The KJV didn't even exist until 1611, so are those people saying that God's written word didn't exist until 1611? The original manuscripts were written in Hebrew, in Aramaic, and in Greek because those were the languages spoken by the people who were writing them. The KJV is NOT and has NEVER BEEN the one single God-ordained and God-approved translation of those manuscripts. The KJV was translated from those ancient manuscripts into the language of the day in 1611 just as modern versions are translated from those manuscripts into the language of our day. Yes, it is crucial that any translation be accurate, but that is true across the board, even with the KJV. In spite of what some people think, Jesus did not speak in King James English to His disciples.
Here's a simple example: If someone wrote me a letter and mentioned "pot" in that letter, it would be crucial that I knew what he meant by "pot". It is one thing to tell someone not to use marijuana. It is something entirely different to tell someone not to use a large metal container. The language changes over time and so do some word meanings. There are many words commonly used in 1611 that aren't even part of our vocabulary today. To insist that Believers have to stumble through language they can't understand is to make a mockery of God's word in the first place. I have very little patience with ministers and churches who insist on KJV or nothing. It's more a revelation of their own ignorance and lack of understanding of God's word than it is anything else.
If you understand and prefer the KJV, then by all means use it. If you best understand NAS, ESV, NIT, NLT, or any other accurate translation of the original manuscripts, then use them. Ultimately, unless you trust God to open His word and reveal its meaning to your heart, you are wasting your time anyway. Talk about straining at a gnat and swallowing a camel!!!
I also really like and read the NASB
Any modern day fan of the sport of tennis can tell you what "let" means today... The meaning has never changed and it has not been "updated," simply because one of the word's meanings began to be used with higher frequency.
The four gospels cover the same time period. Because of that some have more details of events or skip some events/details. This alone doesn’t make them untrue and actually helps their credibility, why make four if all of them contain the same info no more or no less
You have to believe in a perfect Bible or else how do you know what’s being taught is true and I believe the KJV is the perfect word of God cause there’s evidence for it and also all these modern translations either shorten, lengthen or even take out verses, plus it started the great revival and it takes the word of God literal, you can’t trust scholars cause their man we can make mistakes but what we do is take what’s being taught and search to see if it’s true and the word scholar means to study something of interest the difference between the KJV and other translations is how to read the Bible 2 Tim. 2:15 the KJV says rightfully divide the word of truth other translations says handle and I’m not gonna let the scholars handle the word of God and teach wrong doctrines, cause in the Greek and Hebrew lexicons a word can have multiple means and your basically being bias of God and making it what you want it to mean rather then reading the scriptures as it and not changing the meaning
I never understood why people don’t just learn Koine Greek. Islam, for all its faults, encourages people to learn Arabic.
English is my 3rd language but I’m trying to learn KJV for study because my Bible in my own language based on NT copy ( critict text ) mostly equals to NASB, ESV. I don’t know why there’s so many missing translation in modern Bible. I don’t wanna debate over TR vs NT. I’m just grateful that i have both to complete each other.
There is a 'trinity' of salvation: so, I have been saved, I am (or am being saved) and I shall be saved. They're all true. The problem when you play semantics with scripture and try to understand it academically, is that you fail to hear The Holy Spirit, and you miss the message of God's love. 😏
I love the CSB
The ASV is the closest to God's word? Frank, you went down a few notches on that one. Thanks, but I don't want close, I want perfect. I expect nothing less from our creator and Savior. The KJB is just that.
Minor issues keyword he killed it. You killed it in a good way awesome video
No one askes you to rewrite a letter when they don't understand the meaning of a word in the letter. No, you look it up or ask the writer what he meant. Simple Stuff. KJB is the perfect preserved word of God. Thank you, Lord.
These are "minor issues" he says? But God says EVERY word of God is pure.
The point is God promised to preserve His word. Where is it today in 2021?
I believe it is the KJB for English speaking people. If you don't believe this to be so, then where do you believe God's perfect word is, that He promised to preserve? B/c I believe God.
I completely disagree with this gentleman. The King James Version Is The Accurate English translation many Greek and Jewish scholars agree. They won't recommend other versions but the king James. Please people of God do your research. Don't believe every teacher on RUclips. Do your research, God Bless You ❤
Brother. The final authority is given to you by God. If we look to prove truth through a version of words, are the spirit of those same words being followed?
Jason Wright The deeper you study the more you see Jesus in the Old Testament, and prophecy all over the place. What's good about the KJV is that it causes you to dig deeper and study harder, finding out what certain words mean from their original language on your own. You can really feel the Holy Spirit during those deep study moments. The modern versions of the Bible have done the study for you, watering down that intimacy with the Word, and also changing the text altogether. A very percise and targeted deception to the body of Christ by the master deciever.
I have a question? Sorry I don't know all the terms and such but my question is this. So the Dead Sea scrolls have provided evidence of books missing in the or left out of the bible. Where are the scrolls for the books of the old and new testament?
The Dead Sea Scrolls provided manuscripts of the OT books, it did not add any "missing books". We know from Jewish writings what books they considered canon, so it is not a mystery.
OT and NT manuscripts exist as papyrus fragments, parchments, scrolls and codexes. A good book to read on this is "From Texts to Translations" by Wagner.
The current Bible is full of contradictions. Jesus was not GOD, he was
simply a prophet like all others prophets, you All Christians have been
deceived. Wake Up!
I like the poetic flow of the King James, but it is not the best translation. It in itself is a revision of the Bishops Bible of 1558. However, in it's day it was the best they had. It was castigated when it first came out for being printed in vulgar language. Vulgar back then meant in the common, lest formal English of the day; not offensive language as we view the word today. The New American Standard is considered by most Biblical scholars to be the most accurate, but I still refer to the KJV from time to time.
Most so-called translations today are "created" so as to make the Bible more readable for those whose education and reading level is limited. This is a good thing. The more the Scriptures can be read by everyone, the better.
*NO* ... If you want to learn 1611 English than read the KJV you will also need a 1611 dictionary. Another example: the word "worship" does not have the same connotations as it does today. If you want to learn and actually understand then the first thing you need is a desire for spiritual truth ... I suggest to pray for it! There are many false doctrines and false teachings thereby many false religions that want to hide and keep from accurate truth. To understand translations *(NOTE: translations are not inspired)* I recommend the Book "Truth in Translation" by Jason David Deduhn
Or....you could repent, be baptised and receive the Holy Spirit and KNOW you are saved. At that point the Holy Spirit will open your eyes and your understanding to the Scriptures. The simple Salvation message of God!
If the bible is the word of god, then why do people need to accept other peoples interpretations of other peoples translations of it?
Doesnt that make the bible "mans word" instead of "gods word"?
(1:22) I like the KJV, but he has a valid point.
Not only that, but the last time the KJV was updated was 1769, with the same language. Another issue is that the KJV is based on newer manuscripts that has 17 added verses(to be fair the KJV translators were using the best manuscripts they had at the time). The KJV is very beautifully written and a fine translation of you can understand it.
I disagree these aren’t minor issues ….
King James only - all the way!
They are major issues that’s the point!! For instance the NIV leads out the divinity of Jesus in many verses. 99% truth is still lie. This is the first time I’ve disagreed with this man on stage
Why is it when there is an issue against the KJV they always make it a major issue, but when it's against the newer versions they always make it a minor issue?
I'm not KJVO, but I've always noticed this.
There is no such thing as a King James Bible. A King James translation or Version, but not King James Bible. It's God's Bible, and only God's Bible!!!
Stop putting a man's name on God's Holy Word!
David Mosteller , you are misunderstanding.
There is a major issue of translation, which is the word "day" in Genesis. Notice that the meaning of the word day in this sentence does not mean 24 hours. : In Adam's "day" the word day has two meanings, like it has in our "day." In old Hebrew the word used here for the word day, rarely meant 24 hours, but could mean 24 hours, the most common usage is was that day=era not 24 hours. Check it out, "In the "day" you eat of the fruit of good and evil, you will die." Well after Adam ate the fruit, it goes on to say he lived to be more than 900 years old. Well that is one long day. The problem is that theologians who then want to insist that it is a 24 hour period of time are really just mistaken.
I read the translation that I understand
codices P66 P75 (both c. 175-225 CE) and 03 (c. 325-375 CE) contain ΟΥΠΟ (ουπω, not yet) at John 7:8, while the later codex 01 (c. 375-425 CE) has ΟΥΚ (ουκ, not) at that place.
To get the word of God right, you need to have the right word of God. Stick with the KJB. Words have changed meanings since the ASV has been written. That is a poor excuse to understand the KJB.
On the average there are about 60 words added to the English dictionary monthly. Are you going to change the word of God ever month? Or even annually? That would be senseless. You don't change Shakespeare? (or maybe you do). If the KJB doesn't define the word in the context, cross references will define it most of the time. Something the new version don't even come close to, b/c they are not the word of God. Besides the new versions don't get rid of every supposedly difficult word.
A few words the ASV uses:
Seer
maidens
assuaged
kine
hocked
fourscore
smitten
goodlier
slew
dearth
the list goes on... no one uses these words much anymore. So don't read the ASV.
Poor excuse not to use the KJB when the ASV also has antiquated words.
I would rather spend time on translation and old words if i am sure that is the oldest version in english. A Bible written today may "miss" a lot of marxism and PC trickling in. When im uncertain about anything in the Bible i look for discussions on the topic, how it was writen in hewbrew , etc.
Except for The Message....that thing is atrocious. I will even go to say that it is an evil book. It distorts The Word so horribly.
Yes, The Message and The Passion need to never be read
Frank makes some good points about opposite meanings, but I have to go with the questioner on this. Seems like he's done his homework on this & knows what he's talking about.
@JuneAtHomePH The Bible translation issue is one of the most serious in our day! It is one area where I take issue with Frank. He believes that the originals were inspired, but that the copies & hence the translations are all up for grabs & that some translations are better than others but they all have their problems & none can be defended ultimately. I hold to a doctrine of inspiration & preservation. If God has not preserved His Word, we have no truly ultimate & final authority.
@JuneAtHomePH I understand his example with the archaic words in the KJV (I don't agree with his conclusion.) It can also be shown that clarity is an issue that is not solved by updating a version. The proliferation of translations on the market today does not help the situation. It adds to the confusion. As soon as they stop selling, there will be something to take their place. It's about money primarily & any other reasons are secondary. Publishers have a whole marketing plan they follow when they are coming out with a new translation. And most people like Frank either don't see it or don't care. I believe that Frank is sincere in what he confidence in the clip. But sincerity does not equal being right. He challenges the questioner on his position on the KJV & in doing so, reveals his own lack of confidence in it. (Most likely on purpose.) I personally can't figure out how someone who takes the position on the Scripture that Frank espouses here (& that is most of the modern teachers, preachers & scholars of today.) can do what they do when they don't believe they have a final authority they can lean on.
@JuneAtHomePH I am enjoying our conversations! I sense the presence of the Holy Spirit in them! I really love your comment here about the archaic words & what was passed down even before what we have received! I'm not sure I'd ever thought of it quite that way before! What we have in the KJV is there the way it is in order for us to stop & think about what we're reading.
@JuneAtHomePH Yes! I did know of Tyndale's last words. He is one of my heroes! Much of the Bible that Henry VIII allowed to be published was Tyndale's translation work that Henry wanted nothing to do with. God truly does work in mysterious ways! Your testimony concerning the KJV is truly a blessing & encouragement! Thank you for your boldness! Let's please keep in touch!
Ask yourself this, how many times do you change something before it's not what it was anymore?
Here's the thing if nasb is the best version. Why does it have revisions?
The easiest way to prove our bible version is correct is to check isa 14:12 if it blaspheme Jesus.. then it is the wrong version. KJV didn't blaspheme Jesus.
Which verse is he talking about?
Just read the preface of the KJV, it’s called The Translators to the Reader... the translators themselves are all for updating translations. They never wanted anyone to deify the KJV
Yeah he's right. The bible is a minor issue not a big deal 🙄🙄🙄
The King James Version Easy Read Bible is a very good option if you love KJV. It is the original KJV, but updates the old English archaic words to modern English words. It is abreviated KJVER. It has a list of every word that has been changed such as "you" for "thou"
I think what was said in this video was pretty concise, Wretched radio is awesome.
Can someone please address the new Gospel of Inclusion? There are a lot of people asking questions.
You don’t get the wrong understanding. The Bible says to study, so why wouldn’t you word study and see the meaning of these words.
I read the Geneva Bible.
17 min video.
Please watch & stick with KJB
Proofs here from pastor Gene Kim.
m.ruclips.net/video/z2BOWSaGuA4/видео.html
Acts 8:37, Romans 16:24 and many other verses are missing out of NIV,ESV and NASB. I wonder if that's a major isseu or not according to this guy.
There were Bibles before the King James Bible like if something is changed from Saved to being saved I have my doubts
No minor issues in the bible.
No one askes you to rewrite a letter when they don't understand the meaning of a word in the letter. No, you look it up or ask the writer what he meant. Simple Stuff. KJB is the perfect preserved word of God. Thank you, Lord.
These are "minor issues" he says? But God says EVERY word of God is pure.
The point is God promised to preserve His word. Where is it today in 2021?
I believe it is the KJB for English speaking people. If someone doesn't believe this to be so, then where do they believe God's perfect word is, that He promised to preserve? They don't believe God can preserve His word for us today. I just believe God.
@@dkgrace6743 so what are you saying. Cause all bibles that have been translated contain some error or some changed meaning. I also believe the king james to be the best we have., but I myself have seen error in it, or seen something in it that shouldn't be there.
@@reynaldoperez7285 You didn't answer my comment as to where you think the perfectly preserved word of God is, that God promised would always be here, is.
It can't be ALL of them, right? B/c most of them do not say or mean the same thing, even the opposites in many cases. And definitely not the same as the KJB. So, which is it? Where is God's word? Where is God's words? Thanks for your comment. Have a great week.
I choose the King James Version largely because of the poetic beauty of the language. I like to speak aloud when I read the Bible as to place the Word of God deeper into my mind, and so I prefer a translation that sounds beautiful, poetic, elegant, and authoritative when spoken. So many newer Bible translations today just sound so clunky and awkward when spoken aloud because the translators did not care much for making their translations sound poetic and beautiful.
Beauty is in the eye of the beholder. Also, our idea of beauty is influenced by what is familiar to us. I grew up with the KJV and find some verses in the Bible (like Ps. 23) more poetic or prettier than those verses in other translations. That being said, I am able to understand the gospel message better using other translations that are not written in Old English. Let me add that I rely on other translations that I have been told are accurate translations of the original text created long before the KJV or the other translation existed. I speak English as my first language. i met a guy that spoke German as his first language. He said to him English sounded clunky and awkward. To me German sounds clunky and awkward. Beauty is in the eye of the beholder. To really understand the meaning of the original word of God is beautiful, no matter which translation you read.
@@jackfanning7952 then why are you triggered by people who use the KJV
@@Aaron-dq3xz Because some people who use the KJV assert that the other translations created after the KJV are not accurate translations of the original texts. I am also triggered by Christians who think that speaking in tongues are signs of a true Christian, or that if you are not healed after praying for healing, you must not have enough faith; or if you suffer from misfortune, you must have been a sinner (See the Book of Job).
@@jackfanning7952 other translations are inaccurate, omit verses, entire passages and teach false doctrines.
@@Aaron-dq3xz Do you consider ALL other translations than the KJV to be inaccurate, omit verses, entire passages and teach false doctrines?" Some like the Living Bible are less accurate and do not literally follow the original texts. The Living Bible loses accuracy in order to make it easier to read. I prefer more accurate translations. Some modern Bibles more faithfully follow the original scripture than the KJV, but interpret the original texts into language more easily understood in today's vernacular than the everyday English language of 1611. Do you somehow believe that the people who translated the KJV are more capable of accurately presenting the scriptures than Bible scholars today? Are they somehow more spiritual, more Christian, more intellegent than today's Bible scholars? If you do think that, thou are wrong. Today's scholars are at least as thorough in understanding and interpreting the literal meaning of those scriptures into today's vernacular as the KJV interpretors were into the language of those times.
Wrong Shakespeare language was the best English ever spoke.
Shakespeare's Bible was the Geneva Bible.
My NIV does not have many verses that the king james has 🙁
O com'on guys salvation is a major doctrine! being save ?(niv)meaning you have to work for it vs kjv(you know you have eternal life its a done deal ) God does the saving
What about I John 5:7?
No Greek manuscript contains that reading until after the invention of the printing press. It is not a part of the original.
@@bryanjacobs1423 source?
Frank is off base. New versions often use more difficult words. New versions have many words missing. Verses missing. Many errors. New versions also use archaic words. Jesus said man shall not live by bread alone but by every word of God. So, where are the every words of God?
What about Christians whose language isn’t English?
Good question. How many languages was the bible written in? Hebrew, Greek and a very little Aramaic. What did people do who didn't understand those languages? They still needed to know God. They had to go to the Jew's to know God in the OT. (Gen - Acts 8...)