วีดีโอ

God preserved His word through the 25000 manuscript evidence.

Competition us good and produces better products. Many bibles is beneficial.

The Bible existed before the kjv. The first book printed in 1450 was the Catholic Bible

Thd NLT and NET are much stronger for the Deity of Christ than the kjv.

1Jn5:7 is definitely not found in the original.

The modern bibles contain ALL of God's truth. The kjv us a conflate text

To is correct. In Mt5:22 Jesus says, but I say TO you. The two thoughts are parallel and agree. To is right. My NET is accurate

I like and use the NET.

So-called knowledge. 1Tim6,:20 Corrrect. Gods word of truth is the true knowledge, while mortal man's fabricated religions are man's wisdom, so-called knowledge.

Matt 5: 21, 27, 33 MEV uses "by" Bible Gateway The Holy Bible, Modern English Version. Copyright © 2014 by Military Bible Association. Published and distributed by Charisma House.

No, you are mistaken 7:10 it's Highly Unlikely that 666 is written before 616! My reasoning is that the texts are not written in the spirit of is this, that or the other AND Revelation 22:18 is staring anyone in the face! So in this text is 616 alone

Anything that has had the involvement of Westcott and Hort is not to be trusted. Once one finds out who they were, what they believed, and what said about Scriptures, one will depart from their heretical work they came up with, the Critical Texts (their hybrid bible). Thanks to their heretical job, the Jehovah Witnesses sprung out, and so other false cults. A JW cult would have not flourished never ever using the Majority Text (TR). It is impossible to come up with such a cult using the TR. Depart from the Critical Text. Since 1881 all these two men have caused division amongst God's people; manyfalse doctrines and false religion has evolved as a result.

It should be noted that the 1588 Pastors and Professors of Geneva French Bible says, "par les anciens" and has in the footnote "aux anciens" as well as Diodati's 1607 Italian Bible translated these as "dagli" hence "by the" and in the footnote says, "or, to the elders." Also the Malerbi (or Malermi) Italian Bible translated from the Vulgate (the first Italian Bible printed in 1471) reads the same as Diodati. Beza's footnote: Au distis, ηκούσατε. His verbis significat falsas legis interpretationes iampridem in Iudaeorum synagogis receptas. Praestat enim τοῖς ἀρχαίοις explicare quasi scriptuum sit ὑπὸ τῶν ἀρχαίοις (vt sic notentur synagoge doctores, iampridem sic docentes, qui solebant patrum & maiorum nomina suis falsis interpretationibus praetexere) quàm ad auditores referre. Et diligenter obseruandum est, ita praecipuè notari adiectas à Scribis appendices, qualis est ista, Quisquis occiderit, damnas erit iudicij. Caeterùm prorsus ineptiunt, neque quod sit Euangelij & Legis discrimen intelligunt, qui ex hac Christi disputatione constituunt, Christum idcirco etiam venisse, vt nos arctioribus quàm veterem populum vinculis constringeret: guū è contrario idcirco fuerit missus vt nos à maledictione Legis absolueret. Semper igitur Lex ita suit intelligenda vt nunc à Christo explicatur, spiritualis nimirum, vt loquitur Apostolus Rom. 7.14. id est, non tantum ipsas exteriores actiones, sed imprimis intimas etiā cogitationes arguens: sed quum altier à Scribis explicaretur, & recta explicatio ad intelligendum & expetendum Euangelij beneficium prorsus requiratur, atque preire remissioni peccatorum resipiscentiam oporteat, nec ad resipiscētiam adduci possit nisi qui se coram Deo reum esse cognouerit: idcirco fuerunt etiam false istae opiniones, praesertim longo iam vsu inueteratae, detegendae ac refellende, vt cognito morbo ad vnicum hunc medicum homines accurrerent: quod omnibus quoque fidis Euangelij doctoribus est sedelò faciendum. You have heard, ἠκούσατε. In these words, it signifies the false interpretations of the law that have long been accepted in the synagogues of the Jews. For it is better to explain τοῖς ἀρχαίοις as if it were written ὑπὸ τῶν ἀρχαίων (so that the teachers of the synagogues, who have long been teaching in this way, may be noted, for they were accustomed to cloak their false interpretations with the names of the fathers and ancestors) than to refer to the listeners. And it should be diligently observed that the additions made by the Scribes, such as 'Whoever kills will be subject to judgment,' are particularly noted here. However, those who believe that Christ's purpose was to bind us with stricter chains than the old people are entirely mistaken and do not understand the difference between the Gospel and the Law. On the contrary, Christ was sent to free us from the curse of the Law. Therefore, the Law has always been understood in the way Christ now explains it, as spiritual, as the Apostle speaks in Romans 7:14, that is, not only addressing outward actions but especially the innermost thoughts as well. But since it was otherwise explained by the Scribes, and a correct explanation is entirely necessary for understanding and desiring the benefit of the Gospel, and repentance must precede the remission of sins, and no one can be led to repentance unless he recognizes himself as guilty before God: therefore, these false opinions, especially those now long established by use, had to be revealed and refuted so that, knowing the disease, people would rush to this one physician: this is what all faithful Gospel teachers must diligently do.

I looked up Matthew 5:27 and 5:33 in the KJV, NKJV, NLT, WEB, ISV, CSB, NASB and the 1599 Geneva Bible. None of them say "to them" except the 1599 Geneva Bible. Alot of them don't even say "of old" or don't have the phrase. NKJV says to those. Some just say "it was said" or "it was told" or "to the ancients." I think it is simple phraseology and no mistakes in any translation. I love the KJV but have found 6 obvious mistakes in it.

My question would be where have they heard? That might answer my question whether it’s to or by

Diodati's Italian also uses "scienza" (as does the Vulgate) which is defined in the Vocabolario degli Accademici della Crusca of the early 1600s as "Notizia certa di che che sia, dependente da vera cognizione de' suo' principi." which is "Certain knowledge of whatever it may be, dependent on true understanding of its principles."

Come to Buffalo, NY. I will take you to Tim Hortons. 😊

In my studies, I have found out that every time I challenged the KJV translators, I was wrong. They knew what they were doing. You even said as much. You are coming around. 😊

I was just looking at the NASB 77. It has "ancients of old were told". I am glad you are in the leave it alone camp. The modern critical text should be burned!

It should be noted that the 1588 Pastors and Professors of Geneva French Bible says, "par les anciens" and has in the footnote "aux anciens" as well as Diodati's 1607 Italian Bible translated these as "dagli" hence "by the" and in the footnote says, "or, to the elders." Also the Malerbi (or Malermi) Italian Bible translated from the Vulgate (the first Italian Bible printed in 1471) reads the same as Diodati. Beza's footnote: Au distis, ηκούσατε. His verbis significat falsas legis interpretationes iampridem in Iudaeorum synagogis receptas. Praestat enim τοῖς ἀρχαίοις explicare quasi scriptuum sit ὑπὸ τῶν ἀρχαίοις (vt sic notentur synagoge doctores, iampridem sic docentes, qui solebant patrum & maiorum nomina suis falsis interpretationibus praetexere) quàm ad auditores referre. Et diligenter obseruandum est, ita praecipuè notari adiectas à Scribis appendices, qualis est ista, Quisquis occiderit, damnas erit iudicij. Caeterùm prorsus ineptiunt, neque quod sit Euangelij & Legis discrimen intelligunt, qui ex hac Christi disputatione constituunt, Christum idcirco etiam venisse, vt nos arctioribus quàm veterem populum vinculis constringeret: guū è contrario idcirco fuerit missus vt nos à maledictione Legis absolueret. Semper igitur Lex ita suit intelligenda vt nunc à Christo explicatur, spiritualis nimirum, vt loquitur Apostolus Rom. 7.14. id est, non tantum ipsas exteriores actiones, sed imprimis intimas etiā cogitationes arguens: sed quum altier à Scribis explicaretur, & recta explicatio ad intelligendum & expetendum Euangelij beneficium prorsus requiratur, atque preire remissioni peccatorum resipiscentiam oporteat, nec ad resipiscētiam adduci possit nisi qui se coram Deo reum esse cognouerit: idcirco fuerunt etiam false istae opiniones, praesertim longo iam vsu inueteratae, detegendae ac refellende, vt cognito morbo ad vnicum hunc medicum homines accurrerent: quod omnibus quoque fidis Euangelij doctoribus est sedelò faciendum. You have heard, ἠκούσατε. In these words, it signifies the false interpretations of the law that have long been accepted in the synagogues of the Jews. For it is better to explain τοῖς ἀρχαίοις as if it were written ὑπὸ τῶν ἀρχαίων (so that the teachers of the synagogues, who have long been teaching in this way, may be noted, for they were accustomed to cloak their false interpretations with the names of the fathers and ancestors) than to refer to the listeners. And it should be diligently observed that the additions made by the Scribes, such as 'Whoever kills will be subject to judgment,' are particularly noted here. However, those who believe that Christ's purpose was to bind us with stricter chains than the old people are entirely mistaken and do not understand the difference between the Gospel and the Law. On the contrary, Christ was sent to free us from the curse of the Law. Therefore, the Law has always been understood in the way Christ now explains it, as spiritual, as the Apostle speaks in Romans 7:14, that is, not only addressing outward actions but especially the innermost thoughts as well. But since it was otherwise explained by the Scribes, and a correct explanation is entirely necessary for understanding and desiring the benefit of the Gospel, and repentance must precede the remission of sins, and no one can be led to repentance unless he recognizes himself as guilty before God: therefore, these false opinions, especially those now long established by use, had to be revealed and refuted so that, knowing the disease, people would rush to this one physician: this is what all faithful Gospel teachers must diligently do.

Context is King!

Leave the text alone. If you see it as "To" or "By", put a note in the side column and leave the main text as you found it. Walk by faith, not by sight! Having said this, I thank God for your desire to understand the truth. God's best to you Pastor.

This is wonderful info. We appreciate this video.

Logic says you must trust the works of more than 40 SUPER GENIUSES SAVANT EINSTEIN-BRAIN ANCIENT LANGUAGES CAMBRIDGE OXFORD DEAN PROFESSORS KJV SCHOLARS. God equipped them for the super difficult translation's works of dead languages to modern English language. Logic says you don't trust the low IQ translation. So, if you want to be smart, you choose EINSTEIN-BRAIN. If you want to be otherwise, reject the EINSTEIN-BRAIN and be smart according to your own world.

Finally got around to listening. I'm not too hard hard on the KJV guys for the meme and using the words anachronistically. I can think of several concepts that almost everyone assumes when reading the Bible which are centuries, sometimes millennia out of place. For translations, I can think of only two more types of Bible translations we need: 1. A translation of the NT and the LXX together, translating the terms the same way between each. There is not one Bible out there that I know of which translates NT terminology the way it does OT. If we use "Christ" for χριστος in the NT, we should in the OT. This is excepting obviously different use cases of the same word: πρεσβυτερος as "elder," "presbyter," and "ambassador" would obviously need to be treated differently. 2. Our translations transliterate words so that people have no idea what it means, have a bad definition, or take only part of the definition. Take "demon." It means "intermediary/mediating spirit/god" and is not inherently negative (I realize it is always used negatively in the NT). Getting this wrong has clear doctrinal implications. These transliterated words as well as church words really are a problem in our reading the Bible. If we got a Bible that fulfilled those two criteria (or two which did them separately), I think there'd be absolutely nothing left for English translations.

Is it not interesting that God allowed the most influential English translation for 400 years to read "by them"? He sure knows how to keep us studying the Word! And, He reveals those of us who are of a gentle spirit as opposed to the censorious and acrimonious. AN ASIDE: Have you checked out the notes in Dr. Pickering's NT The Sovereign Creator Has Spoken? They function as a commentary of sorts.

Gracias.

Brother Dwayne: The Law was mostly given BY Moses. By the one man, singular. I.e. "by him of old time". Moses gave the Law "TO them of old time". To all Israel, plural.

I love- Dr Mark Ward. such a great speaker- and theologian

Both Pickering and Boyd in their recent NT editions in English translate "to."

lol, what a logic, the more than 40 super savant geniuses CAMBRIDGE OXFORD UNIVERSITIES DEAN PROFESSORS who worked for 7 years were WRONG. GREAT! That's the GENIUS of anti-kjv Neo-Evangelical movement logic. lol. The KJV is the PURE, PRECISE, and PERFECT words of God. All modern bibles are defective, deceitful, and fake bibles.

This is interesting. I see that BibleGateway has "Ye have heard that it was said of them of old time, ..." with "of them" instead of "by them". I am guessing BibleGateway has a typo?

Thank you for sharing your thoughts and for including time stamps. 😊

I think it's amazing that he says M5 is the best and better than M7 while Pickering is very certain that his M7/F35 is the best and even says it matches the originals. I would love for you/someone to unpack this.

Northern Washington or Southern Washington? I'm on the Oregon border. I'd love to meet you in person if it's not too far and you're having a general meetup that's compatible with my schedule.

You know, Dwayne, I bet if we added up all the Bibles (printed) in the U.S. right now (in homes, churches, bookstores, warehouses), there'd be enough for several for each person in this country, including all the people who don't even want one! And that's NOT including the bewildering number of versions (in various languages) that this internet accessible country provides! Why are the publishers complicit in this? They don't need to sponsor all this nonsense. But it sure pays the bills for them, doesn't it, when Christian Bible "collectors" are throwing money at every version in every conceivable format to come down the pike. Heck, I can't even look at an ESV without a strong emotional reaction to the money-making motives behind all the forms that are being shoved at us in a you-have-to-have-this-new-improved-Bible mentality! What in the world are we doing letting our Christian brothers and sisters around the world go without Bibles (maybe not even ONE in their own language) because we have this unhealthy and no doubt grievous-to-God addiction for buying Bibles? One day we will be facing all these "least of Christ's brethren," you might say, and I don't think I can bear the thought of looking at their faces and hearing their stories about how they were praying for their rich Christian brothers and sisters (i.e., us -- the richest Christians in history anywhere in the world!) to provide Bible. But we just couldn't be bothered enough. I bet if all U.S. Christians were to forego buying Bibles for the remainder of 2024 and all of 2025 (at least) and give the money they would spend on themselves to Bible Societies and Bible Translators (Wycliffe, etc.), we could saturate the unreached -- and the already reached! -- people. It's a matter of will-power and wisdom in using the resources we're one Day going to be accountable to God for.

Science falsely so-called, could it mean false philosophy?

Possibly each of the 47 was a polyglot. They knew Hebrew, Aramaic, Greek, Latin, and English (all the languages used to create the KJV, and they probably knew French). Lancelot Andrews, the main editor, was fluent in 17 languages. The importance of the committee is not the committee in itself. Lots of translations are done that way. The importance is that it was done by the church. It is a canonical translation, of which there may not be five in the entire history of the New Testament age. It is done under a controlling authority and not by any committee that could be formed for its own whims. There is an 1873 Cambridge update, whereas the 1769 is the last Oxford edition. Unfortunately, one of the edits made over the 13 editions, up through 1873, is that the word spirit started to be capitalized more often than it should be, or more often than it could be proven that it should be. There are many times when the current KJV Makes us think the passages are talking about the Spirit of God when they are likely, or very possibly, talking about the human spirit. Further, it is a liturgical translation. Just as with Shakespeare, while it is not the common English on the street, it is the English anyone would have spoken upon entering the palace Or meeting a palace noble on the street. The KJV, along with Wicliffe's, Tindale's, and Coverdale's translations, use the language of nobility because God is worthy of that and more. It shows a respect and an acknowledgment that God transcends. When the KJV started going out of the local church, so did a worship of which God is worthy, and then so did true doctrine. Additionally, as did the new king James (and a few others from the mid 20th century and back), the subjunctive mood was brought into the translation because the subjunctive mood was still a necessary part of grammar. The difference between Shall/will, should/Would has been lost today. Yet the linguistic nuances behind this verbal mood are important for recognizing the subjunctive mood in the original language and in our own as well as accurate meaning. We also have in the KJV Recognition of the singular and plural second person. I love using the NKJV, but I miss this important nuance. Just this morning, I was reading Isaiah 44, and because the word 'you' was used, I thought God has started speaking to Israel. but it was the pronoun 'thee' masculine which meant God was still talking about/to Cyrus the king. Quite an important difference.

In the 70s I came to Jesus, and I started out with NAS and never regretted. But my daughter came to Jesus 10 years ago and she landed on NKJV. She was knowledgeable of Hebrew and Latin. This her familiarity with the nature of ancient languages from childhood made me stop and consider why she much prefers NJV. I may be ready for the change for myself. By the way; she is a very even tempered and fair minded soul, but almost turns blue in the face with the Passion (transfusion?).

Where can i get a list of the 105 franks?

Great video. What's difference between this and conjectural emmendation?