วีดีโอ

Erasmus collated the Greek Text with a parallel Latin text. King James translators used Coptic, Spanish, Syriac, Ethiopic, and many other languages. There are a few verses where Latin manuscripts filled in when the Greek was silent but there were witnesses in other languages or early church writers quoted them. They also used Beza, Elzivir, and Stephanus Greek texts.I will look into making a video. They used everything at their disposal. Thanks for the comment!

Where is this list of about 430 manuscripts

@@WhatsinyourBible , Manuscript Catalog - Muenster Germany. Do you have Willker's Textual Commentary on the Gospels?

Yah, I'm hearing I butchered it up. My grandmother would be rolling in her grave. She was from Hadleigh near South End. I can hear her now. Oy! It's Glosster. Thanks for the heads up!

Slight correction, it's "JAH", not "Yah". KJB.

Did you see any of the manuscript evidence I posted? How can it be quoted by Early Church writers before the "Oldest and most reliable" manuscripts existed?

Or in denial.

Is the OED that was written nearly 200 years after the Reformation Bibles inspired? Never interpret a complete verse by an incomplete verse. The Reformation translators had access to the words you claim the definition actually is and yet they chose Study instead of the ones you prefer. We know this because those very words were used in other places in the Bible. No one can imply they know what the Reformation translators were thinking. But we do know they chose Study instead of the descriptive words of study.

@ So let’s go to the ultimate standard. What did the Greek word there in 2 Tim 2:15 mean when Paul wrote it under divine inspiration?

What an awesome Mom!

Praise the Lord! Give all of the Glory to the Lord! We all struggle with sin every day and will until we leave this wretched body. But Jesus has our back! He is our advocate. He is our redeemer! Keep reading and praying every day! God Bless!

The new translations use a different line of manuscripts from Alexandria, Egypt. They form the minority text. There are only about 58 manuscripts in this group. Whereas the Majority text has about 5948 manuscripts which are the underlying basis for the Reformation Bibles.

What does "valid" mean? Is Erasmus text valid? Beza? Elzivir? Stephanus? Or is it just the Vaticanus and Sinaiticus?

Yes. New American Standard Version or Bible.

You mean the New American Sucker’s Bible?

Woo hoo! The more the merrier!

The point is that sometimes people can't see the forest for the trees. Context helps to understand not only words but concepts. If you don't like the King James, go read something else. There are over 1000 options that fix your problem with the King James. Why do you care that someone reads the King James? Sometimes God prefers archaic words. 1 Samuel 9:9 (Beforetime in Israel, when a man went to inquire of God, thus he spake, Come, and let us go to the seer: for he that is now called a Prophet was beforetime called a Seer.) The story continues on and uses the word "seer" instead of prophet. Ask God why he continued to use an archaic word and didn't use prophet instead of Seer. In the long run, which breeds a better result: gain gotten by overcoming challenges, or have everything given to them? At sometime in our life we have to eat meat and wean ourselves off pablum. Just think, if you ever get on Jeopardy! and they ask "Biblical word for broom" you could win thousands!

@@WhatsinyourBible I don't have a problem with those who prefer the King James, but I take issue with (a) those who erroneously insist that it's the only legitimate translation, and (b) those who insist that archaic, obsolete words and "false friends" (words whose meaning have changed over time, leading to bad interpretations) aren't an issue. It's akin to Roman Catholicism's dogma that the obscure Latin Vulgate was the only legitimate translation. Thank God for Tyndale (and faithful contemporary translators) for the commitment to make the Scriptures understandable for the "plowboy".

@@sbs8331 Since Tyndale's translation matches the majority of the King James your flattering words seem pretty empty. Tyndale has most of what you disagree with in the King James. Since those of us who believe we have an inerrant perfect word of God in English today don't torture or burn people at the stake, what are you so afraid of? Or is it jealousy that you don't believe you have something you can hold in your hands as being God's perfect word? Is it "If you can't have it, no one can?" Are you a god in that their belief that God preserved His word offends you so that you must punish them by attempting to destroy their faith? The Rainbow has a completely opposite signification than that of the Bible. Are we then to throw away God's promise behind it because it has been hijacked by those who hate and profane God and His laws? Or do we stand for the truth and teach the real meaning behind the Rainbow thereby "offending" the profane?

God Bless!

The plowboy at that time, as with most people, couldn't read at all. There are over 1000 English translations in existence today. [I even have a copy of the LEGO Bible.] All of them are "updates" or revisions or new versions. The Simplified King James just came out a year or so ago. There's the New King James, the KJV 2000, and the American King James. How many do we need? When is it good enough? The NIV has updated itself frequently since 1976. Anyone can choose whatever they want the Bible. Why does the King James have to be eliminated, ESPECIALLY when it's the most read Bible than all of the others combined? (I like your definition of Chambering though. I'd like to do some Chambering this weekend!) ; P

Wow Ben, you make a perfect point. I had no idea what chambering meant either and a bunch of words I thought I knew, I didn't really know in the KJV and was fooling myself.

A LEGO Bible?!? Oh I need that. Lol. I thought the AI generated pirate Bible translation was over the top. The argument that anyone can pick whatever Bible le they want is really flawed however. There are several ways of saying the exact thing. Just because the words are ordered differently or the word choices the translators use are different doesn’t change the message. And if it does, the translators aren’t doing their job. If anything, having my parallel Bible app with multiple translations side by side has helped me see that the message is the same and the differences aren’t as problematic (or demonic) as some would have us believe. Ask ten people to translate any text and you’ll end up with ten different translation choices. The question will never be “which translation is easiest to memorize, which is the most used, or which has no copyright?” The best question to ask is “which translation transmits the message into words that convey that original message to me with accuracy and clarity?” It’s not really edifying if it’s not clear and it’s not Gods Word if it’s not accurate.

@@bensbab The LEGO story of the Jacob's sons taking revenge on Dinah's rapist is hilarious (where they circumcise the guys and then kill them).. I wanted the Pirate one for my collection but where do you stop. Then I noticed in the small print it was delivered by Mormon missionaries. It would have made for a fun conversation but still not worth the $30.00. The point being made was that there are at least 4 "updates" of the King James that are being ignored that allegedly address the notion that the King James has to be revised. It's already been done but ignored. Yet, the attacks still come forth. Not to mention all of the other translations that compare themselves to the King James. That tells me that there is something else behind the attack. When John Reynolds presented his Millenary Petition in 1603 to King James, virtually everything on the petition was ignored or dismissed but it was decided that a new translation be made that was as sound and consonant to the original languages and as literal as possible. No commentary, no notes. The King James Bible is the product of that proposal.

@@WhatsinyourBible yeah, the Mormon thing is the only reason I didn’t purchase the Pirate Bible as a Christmas present for a friend of mine with a warped sense of humor and a love for the KJV. I have my own unprovable theories as to why the KJV updates will never be accepted and it has to do with the Ruckmanite influence and improper teaching about “every word” being the English words of the KJV and how “things that are different cannot be the same.” In my circles, even Webster’s revision was scorned. I think the majority of those who are KJV only will never accept a revision even when done well because they cannot agree on what updates are acceptable and which are “corrupting the very words of God.” Also, didn’t the KJV translators include footnotes anyway so account for some variants and uncertainties that they were aware of even then? I have personally seen some of these and wish they had been left there as they help English readers recognize that not only is this a translation, but the translators themselves were aware of uncertainties and wanted to leave all the options available.

It only takes one verse to contradict the definition. But, there are more examples in the scriptures since that isn't enough for you.

yes he has. His Hebrish talk takes away from what God wants us to focus on and learn. Just another distraction.

Woo Hoo! Check out the other videos to see if the MEV has all of the others.