That is unfortunate for your son. The ESV has changed wording and removed verses from the Bible thereby changing the meaning of those verses that they have left in.
There is no command in Scripture that demands that anyone read/use only the King James version or any other version of the Bible. There is no command in Scripture that prohibits anyone from reading/using modern translations of the Bible or from reading/using older ones. There is no command in Scripture that demands that one believe that the (1611 or 1769?) King James version is the one perfect Bible. The phrases “King James” or “Authorized Version” occur nowhere in Scripture. The KJV translators, Erasmus, and King James did not die on the cross for you and did not rise from the dead. Only Jesus Christ died on the cross for you; only He rose from the dead. Worship Jesus the divine Prophet (Deut. 18:15,18); not the KJV interpreters. Worship great high priest Jesus (Heb. 4:14); not Roman Catholic priest Erasmus. Worship King Jesus (I Tim. 6:15, Rev. 17:14, Rev. 19:16); not King James.
Isaiah 34;16 " Seek Ye out the Book of the Lord." Now no doubt you're about to take that verse, just eight words, very clear, hard to misunderstand......but you will massage it, twist, it rework it and arrive at the snakes and ladders conclusion that................"well of course it can't possibly mean what it sounds like, it can't just be referring to a book in the sense you mean, impossible........................... ......simple enough for a child.........God has a BOOK, keep up please!!
There is no command in scripture that says the canon of scripture is suppose to be 66 books either. So do you reject the canon of scripture based upon that same logic? Matthew 4:4 But he answered and said, It is written, Man shall not live by bread alone, but by every word that proceedeth out of the mouth of God. Would seem to me that if God tells us we are to live by his every word than logic follows not only should we have them, but we should also be able to tell what they are in their entirety. Thank about it.
Brian Plainfield......Can you connect the dots? 66 Books in the Cannon........66 Chapters in Isaiah.......66 words in the Lord's Prayer..........66 words JESUS spoke in the Synagogue in Nazareth...........The word COMFORT is found 66 times in the KJV............The Golden Candlestick in the Tabernacle had 66 Decorations on it..........I could go on , but I hope you can see that Jesus is the Word.......and the Word is Jesus...........Why do you have a problem believing that God is a God of ORDER .....his word is in ORDER..........No other Bible anywhere in the world is so widely distributed.....published into the billions far exceeding all other translations put together...........The fact that you can suggest that we can just as well read modern translations, shows how little you know about this issue.
Dear Mr. West, Grace & peace to you in abundance. Where does Scripture declare that the KJV is the standard by which all other translations are to be measured?
If you are practically KJV only but don't want to identify as such, it means you're afraid of being called a Ruckmanite or afraid of ridicule from men or losing meetings.
As far as his mention of the Qur'an, Uthman had many variants of the Qur'an destroyed early on and according to the Hadith, Muhammad recited Qur'anic verses in a number of ways. Since Muslims believe Muhammad was perfect it suggests there were indeed many Qur'ans.
"Why does “KJV Churches” have non-KJV churches listed? That’s a question we get frequently, and it’s understandable. With a name like “KJV Churches,” one would initially assume that the only churches listed on such a site would be “KJV Churches.” Unfortunately, the reality is a lot more complicated than that. The first problem is that “KJV-only” means different things to different people. Some churches take an aggressive stance that makes them “more KJV-only” than other churches. For example, many churches would never ascribe “inspiration” to the KJV itself, insisting that it’s only “preserved,” yet would bristle at the idea that someone would consider them “less KJV-only” than another church that takes a more aggressive stance (for example, that the KJV itself represents inspiration). So, instead of trying to find a hard and fast identifier (or mailing a huge questionnaire to every church that wants a listing), we just made things simpler and try to accurately indicate what each church publicly believes based on their publically-available information. The second and probably more practical reason is simple: if people know that your church is (or isn’t) a KJV-only church, they’ll be able to make their decisions more easily. A solidly KJV-only church isn’t likely to be visited by an individual who sincerely doesn’t believe the KJV to be the only English Bible, and a KJV believer isn’t going to visit a non-KJV church if that information is available to him. That helps the non-KJV churches not have visitors that mistakenly assume they’re KJV-only, and it helps church seekers not assume that a church has simply not yet been listed on our site and it turns out that they’re not KJV. We’re sorry that we can’t make everyone happy or cater to the minutiae of every believer out there. We are simply trying to create the most accurate, comprehensive, and useful independent Baptist and KJV Bible-believing church database in the world. Please help us out, for everyone’s benefit. Feel free to drop us a line if you have any questions." - KJVchurches.com
That applies to you as well remember when the Pharisees accused Jesus of casting out demons from the father of demons and he warned them about blaspheming the Holy Spirit which is the unforgivable sin and that is my friend calling something that God or the Holy Spirit has done false or evil so I hope you are taking that into consideration when you talk about other Bible translations the way you do
Have seen pastor say he can see Jesus in all the versions and boasts about how he purposely uses various version weekly and points this out in his sermons; this is why I left the church, that and the many bizarre interpretations he would make which were easily overturned by the word itself. Things like saying Jesus spoke in parables because they were a very common way of speaking back then and were easily understood; WHAT!/? Ofcourse this is not true, at all or in any way either, the disciples themselves asked Him why He was speaking to the people the masses in parables alone and He told them in Mt 13:10-17 that He was doing it to conceal truth from them! Parables are in fact riddles, see Ezekiel 17:2 KJVo . We know & are friends with many still there who hear nothing that troubles them. I think they are brain dead, actually.
King James Only is often used with the belief that KJV has superceded the textus receptus so the KJV is some sort of newer revelation superior to the textus receptus. Peter Ruckman used the KJV to correct the textus receptus rather than the other way around. People who believe in the textus receptus rather than the KJV can allow for new translations of the textus receptus such as nkjv and MEV. People who believe in the textus receptus rather than the KJV will translate from textus receptus into foreign languages such as chinese. People who are King James Only might insist that foreign language bibles should be translated from the KJV rather than the textus receptus.
Peter Ruckman was not correct in all of his decisions as he was a human. Whenever you try to correct the Bible in ANY fashion, you have put yourself above the knowledge of God. And also in regards to translating from the KJV into Nepalese/Chinese/somelanguage is the problem that you have to understand those languages in order to do that accurately. I don't think in Greek and Hebrew so all I know is the KJV and if the Chinese doesn't contradict or differ from the KJV when compared.
That is an absurd claim as the TR was not named or called so until 1633 by two brothers who were printers. The NKJV & MEV are totally corrupt and can not be trusted; only the KJV can be trusted. The KJV is drawn from the TR. Did you know since 1966 agreement with the Vatican and UBS all new language translations have been from the Vatican approved UBS Critical Text. The leave of Mt 13:33 is throughout today and is corrupting thoroughly.
The introduction of the NKJV says it used the Alexandrian text not the RT for its changes. The source text for the KJV ws the source text for all modern translations until the UBS Vatican concord in 1966, from 67 on ALL modern versions use the Alexandrian sourced text of the Vatican, even ALL the primary protestant and Baptist orgs have signed onto this concord.
@@Obediah002 both nkjv and mev are translated from the received text. The nkjv lists the differences with the majority text and the differences with the critical text in the notes.
@@colonyofcells nope, that is the claim but not the truth, at all. Only the KJV translators were faithful too thee word, the very words they were translating; ALL the moderns are not but are "trying" to get at the meaning of the words as they understand them which strips the Spirit from the word(s). See Proverbs 25:2 KJV of course.
It means that 1. They have not studied the issue out. & 2. If they have, they are a compromiser and need the money, people and popularity that comes from being a compromising preacher. 3. They are Laodicean in theology an practice.
The kjv has mistranslations, the word hell (place of eternal torment) is nowhere found in the Hebrew and Greek......Sheol, Hades and Gehenna have different meanings but the translators translated it into the word hell (things that are different are not the same.....study to shew yourself approved unto God 2 Tim. 2 15
The worldly vitriol based upon deceptions and outright lies against the KJB verifies my belief that it must be the faithfully preserved Words of God in the English language. Before attacking that which one is ignorant about, I urge all to view my entire playlist concerning the subject here: th-cam.com/play/PLHXyOw2HNMMpTpAdfIbkDo3iBoUCXhZYh.html
The KJV his at least 2 mistranslaations. Isaiah 14:12 should not be Lucifer. It should be morning star or day star. Lucifer came from the Latin Vulgate. Acts 12:4 should be Passover not Easter. Easter didnt exist when the Greek was written.
2 Peter 1:19 KJV We have also a more sure word of prophecy; whereunto ye do well that ye take heed, as unto a light that shineth in a dark place, until the day dawn, and the day star arise in your hearts: No, the KJV is fine. It's just that the PERversions want to conflate Jesus and the devil.
@@tbuitendykYou can believe that, but the Hebrew word means daystar or morning star. Lucifer is Latin. Erasmas brought it over from the Vulgate. It means light bearer.
Dear Dr. Zeinner & Gentle Reader, the King James Version translators were not King James Only. The King James translators declared: "we do not deny, nay, we affirm and avow, that the very meanest translation of the Bible in English set forth by men of our profession ... containeth the word of God, nay, is the word of God" The King James Version translators also stated that: "variety of translations is profitable for the finding out of the sense of the Scriptures." Source: The Translators to the Reader: Preface to the King James Version
errrr.......Helooooooooo The Preface was not and is not the translated Word of God..........Those Translators were not faced with HUNDREDS of translations as we are today.........don't you get it? They were referring to just a handful of translations available to them.............Stop trying to grasp at straws by reading snatches of the preface. Try and come to the point where you are in agreement with 1 Cor 14;33 " For GOD is not the Author of confusion." Upwards of a thousand translations...........is confusion............
They also said that their goal was not to make a bad translation good, but a good one better...or out of many good ones, ONE PRINCIPAL GOOD ONE NOT JUSTLY TO BE ACCEPTED AGAINST.
There is no issue about that......Of course, the KJV Translators compared Bibles; Tyndale,Wycliffe, Geneva. Bishops and others, what does that prove...........I can assure you they would in no way countenance the ridiculous Bible Babble Buffet that pervades today......upwards of 900 + translations......a traversty. that dishonours the GOD of the Bible, the one who says he is NOT the Author of confusion............but thats fine, if you want to spend your life in perpetual text comparison, commentary review and revision with NO Bible as a complete authority.......go ahead, live the dream, but know this, Psalm 119;89 says that the word is SETTLED in Heaven and guess what,God has settled his word on Earth too........ keep up!
Dr. Zeinner quotes from Romans 16. Was the Apostle Paul "King James Only"? He wrote the letter to the Romans over 1,500 years before 1611/1769. Per Romans 14, the Apostle Paul wrote that one must not judge another over doubtful disputations.
You amaze me......have you read scripture? .......Try Psalm 139,14-16 God has placed within each one of us the BOOK of DNA .......letters, words, full stops...........Surely you know that if just 1 letter in your book is 'wrong' you will be in real trouble.....mutation.......disease.......early death. All laid out in God's Book......I can hear you choking on your cornflakes in laughter.........why not check out Proverbs 30 ; 5................ The King James Bible has outsold into the BILLIONS all other translations. it has remained doctrinally the same of 400 + years.........your modern Bibles will come and go, changing, revising, updating,......the old book will carry on......clearly Blessed by God
Your statement is deceitful. The question is over the Greek that underlies the KJB and the corrupted Greek backing all new versions to one extent or another.
I read only the King James Bible, but may I impose upon you to realize that the King James is not a translation, but a VERSION. It is only a Version of another Bible. ..It is the KJV King James VERSION...A Translation is when you take the Greek and Hebrew and Translate it into a completely new Translation of the Bible ..It is not a version of something else. It May well be different than the King James Version. Is it right or wrong...That is for you and the Holy Ghost to decide.
I understand the KJV is %80 or so the Bishops Bible, they simply improved on the %20, and still we can find palces where they missed it but have curiously found those places are guided, overseen by the HS as He has concealed knowledge/understanding in these places. It is my personal opinion the KJV is the last refinement by the HS of the text of His preserved word, have found Him in the very words of the text and have not once found Him in any of the modern Alexandrian sourced texts.
Martin Baker Martin, maybe you aren't recognizing the right of KJO individuals to believe exactly what they purport. I myself am not KJO but there is a lot of compelling evidence that "modern" translations may be problematic. These translations are gradually diluting and redacting scripture. Also is the diminution of the identity and authority of Jesus Christ. Take care and God bless.
Dear Ms. Smith, Grace unto you, and peace, be multiplied. Please provide some of the "compelling evidence". Please provide examples of the dilution & redacting of scripture, as well as diminution of identity & authority of Jesus Christ. Thank you. A KJO individual is free and welcome to believe. How are Dr. Zeinner & the KJBRC organization recognizing the right of non-KJO individuals?
We can bare your name calling ..........our only crime is to believe that God has according to his promises, given us a perfect word............it seems that you on the other hand believe in bibles like the NIV which has 64,000 words missing against the old book......you remember the old book, the one that has remains unchanged for 400 years, published into the billions, more in demand than any of the 'Johnnie come lately versions' which if want to collect will require a lot of shelving as there are many hundreds of them and they still keep coming...........
Dear Mr. West, God's blessings to you & yours. Name calling? KJO? If that is name calling, i will not use. I followed the title of the video. Assuming that the "old book" refers to the KJV: I disagree with the claim that the KJV remains unchanged for 400 years. The KJV has been revised several times since 1611. The 1611 KJV is not the same as the 1769 KJV. For example, the 1769KJV omits (thankfully) the apocrypha found in the 1611 old book. You are welcome to your old book. May you be blessed by it as i have.
I used to be KJVO, just wasn't dogmatic about it. Then I got tired of having to figure out what the archaic words mean, let alone the archaic idioms. Yes, it can be done and is done with a Strongs exhaustive concordance and a Webster's 1828 dictionary. But it's just a lot easier to use the NKJV or the MEV. The KJVer is a good KJV update that has verse by verse footnotes with the updated words and idioms which make it much easier to understand what you read & it might be OK with the KJVOists.
@@davidbrock4104 If you want to understand the problems with the MEV listen carefully to this link, very eye opening it is. th-cam.com/video/yHPPNK9ixtU/w-d-xo.html
@@davidbrock4104 Never said any verses are missing only changed, same as all the modern Alexandrian sourced bibles, all full of changes and this includes the NKJV. Heres one of those changes from, 1 COR 1:18 MEV "being saved" KJV "are saved, " and you can compare a lot more verses with same changes from the KJV that as this one does affects sound doctrine. Books have been written and continue to be written showing how corrupt these moderns are compared to the KJV.
@@Obediah002 1 Corinthians 1:18 YLT for the word of the cross to those indeed perishing is foolishness, and to us -- those being saved -- it is the power of God, It's not just modern versions using "being saved"
Lies, not all people who trust the KJV is part of the KJVONLY cult. If you read other versions you are just not getting the pure word, but there is some truth in those other versions as much as they adhered to the Textus Receptus, but we know many false versions do not. It matters not what version we read IF we don't take the time to read it at all. Having a KJV means nothing if you are not being doers of the Holy Word of God. God bless. James 1:22-25 kjv 22. But be ye doers of the word, and not hearers only, deceiving your own selves. 23. For if any be a hearer of the word, and not a doer, he is like unto a man beholding his natural face in a glass: 24. For he beholdeth himself, and goeth his way, and straightway forgetteth what manner of man he was. 25. But whoso looketh into the perfect law of liberty, and continueth therein, he being not a forgetful hearer, but a doer of the work, this man shall be blessed in his deed.
@@ToOpen6seven Any body can quote the scripture to try and justify the KJV only cult. The Sadducees quoted scripture But as Jesus pointed out they did not know the scripture or the power of God. If you were a true bible believer rather than a KJV only cultist. You would know that all truth is found in the Lord Jesus Christ. Not in some archaic imperfect uninspired translation like the KJV. In fact your comment makes it clear that you are a cultist. By placing the KJV above the throne of God. Which means you have added a man made tradition to the finished work of Christ. That is another gospel and another gospel is the spirit of divination or witchcraft. You have absolutely nothing that a true believer in Christ has. A true believer that has not fallen for the KJV only deception. You do know that the KJV translators knew their work was not perfect. They said even the meanest translation is still the word of God. The KJV only cult in their delusions pride and arrogance are calling them liars. It Is impossible for you to prove from scripture that the KJV is so called true word of God in English. So many words have changed meaning making the KJV even more inaccurate. Strange that the KJV only cultists never speak in KJV English. Yet these hypocrites try to confine Almighty God to this translation. That is absolute idolatry. Mistranslations like Easter instead of Passover. Calling the Holy Spirit an it four times denying his deity. Latin words like Lucifer borrowed from the Latin Vulgate showing the Catholic influence on the KJV, instead of the more accurate morning star or day star. No Latin word should be in an English translation. Also it is nothing to do with Satan but a prophecy about the king of Babylon who sought to exalt himself above the throne of God. Like the KJV only cult do with their idol. Satan has truly used deceivers and liars of the KJV only cult to sow discord in the body of Christ. Liars and false teachers like professional liar Gail Riplinger. Mike Hoggard with his numerology like Gail Riplinger's so called acrostic algebra. Total witchcraft. Will Kinney incapable of rational thought. Who calls any non KJV cultists. Bible agnostics. So according to his loopy logic the KJV transports were "Bible agnostics". Sam Gipp who said a Russian must learn English to have the true word of God. Not just any old English but the archaic English of the KJV. Hate preacher Steven Anderson who shows no fruit of the Holy Spirit. But all the vile and rotten fruit of the KJV only cult. Never mind he is KJV only, suppose that makes him holy Gene Kim who calls all the excellent more accurate modern translations "Satan's bibles" . How can Satan cast out Satan? That means he is blaspheming the Holy Spirit. Because God is blessing and using the modern translations to bring many to Christ. The late Jack Hyles heretic and KJV only cultist. Who claimed that anybody who heard the gospel from any version other than the KJV. Were born of Satan. The circular reasoning of KJV only cultist David W Daniels full of conspiracy theories. KJV onlyism is without a doubt a false teaching a cult and a cancer, from the pit of hell. That has not only left reasoning behind, but has left sanity behind. Who needs atheists when Satan has the KJV only cult spreading his lies
@@ToOpen6sevenNobody is getting the "pure word of God" reading the KJV. You can quote as many verses you like to try and justify the KJV only deception. But no scripture supports the indefensible unbilical man made tradition of KJV onlyism.
My son was KJV only and firm in that stance....then he went to Bible College. Now it’s nothing but ESV 😔
That is unfortunate for your son. The ESV has changed wording and removed verses from the Bible thereby changing the meaning of those verses that they have left in.
Yes, and the power in his life is gone too
not at all surprised............
unfortunately I can't say he was talked out of KJV only if he was never talked into it.
He obviously never had a firm grasp on even what he believed in or why!
I love ths kjv i go to Baptist church and love it. I jusr hope peopls here dont think someone is not saved if they use a newer version.
I like Ruckman. Dont agree with everything but he preaches the Word rightly divided.
Just missed it. by a hair in accuracy.
Thank you
It's not true that there is only one translation of the Koran. Personally, I wouldn't let a Muslim influence how I look at the Bible.
There are at least 26 known translations of the Koran.
1 Peter 2:2 As newborn babes, desire the sincere milk of the word, that ye may grow thereby:
There is no command in Scripture that demands that anyone read/use only the King James version or any other version of the Bible. There is no command in Scripture that prohibits anyone from reading/using modern translations of the Bible or from reading/using older ones. There is no command in Scripture that demands that one believe that the (1611 or 1769?) King James version is the one perfect Bible. The phrases “King James” or “Authorized Version” occur nowhere in Scripture.
The KJV translators, Erasmus, and King James did not die on the cross for you and did not rise from the dead. Only Jesus Christ died on the cross for you; only He rose from the dead.
Worship Jesus the divine Prophet (Deut. 18:15,18); not the KJV interpreters.
Worship great high priest Jesus (Heb. 4:14); not Roman Catholic priest Erasmus.
Worship King Jesus (I Tim. 6:15, Rev. 17:14, Rev. 19:16); not King James.
Isaiah 34;16 " Seek Ye out the Book of the Lord." Now no doubt you're about to take that verse, just eight words, very clear, hard to misunderstand......but you will massage it, twist, it rework it and arrive at the snakes and ladders conclusion that................"well of course it can't possibly mean what it sounds like, it can't just be referring to a book in the sense you mean, impossible........................... ......simple enough for a child.........God has a BOOK, keep up please!!
There is no command in scripture that says the canon of scripture is suppose to be 66 books either.
So do you reject the canon of scripture based upon that same logic?
Matthew 4:4 But he answered and said, It is written, Man shall not live by bread alone, but by every word that proceedeth out of the mouth of God.
Would seem to me that if God tells us we are to live by his every word than logic follows not only should we have them, but we should also be able to tell what they are in their entirety. Thank about it.
How do you explain the fact that the NIV is missing 64,000 words against the KJV..........?
Brian Plainfield......Can you connect the dots? 66 Books in the Cannon........66 Chapters in Isaiah.......66 words in the Lord's Prayer..........66 words JESUS spoke in the Synagogue in Nazareth...........The word COMFORT is found 66 times in the KJV............The Golden Candlestick in the Tabernacle had 66 Decorations on it..........I could go on , but I hope you can see that Jesus is the Word.......and the Word is Jesus...........Why do you have a problem believing that God is a God of ORDER .....his word is in ORDER..........No other Bible anywhere in the world is so widely distributed.....published into the billions far exceeding all other translations put together...........The fact that you can suggest that we can just as well read modern translations, shows how little you know about this issue.
Dear Mr. West,
Grace & peace to you in abundance.
Where does Scripture declare that the KJV is the standard by which all other translations are to be measured?
If you are practically KJV only but don't want to identify as such, it means you're afraid of being called a Ruckmanite or afraid of ridicule from men or losing meetings.
As far as his mention of the Qur'an, Uthman had many variants of the Qur'an destroyed early on and according to the Hadith, Muhammad recited Qur'anic verses in a number of ways. Since Muslims believe Muhammad was perfect it suggests there were indeed many Qur'ans.
Also some Muslims are trained to used the fact there is “one” Quran as a “soul winning” point. A way to get Jews and Christians tripped up
"Why does “KJV Churches” have non-KJV churches listed?
That’s a question we get frequently, and it’s understandable. With a name like “KJV Churches,” one would initially assume that the only churches listed on such a site would be “KJV Churches.” Unfortunately, the reality is a lot more complicated than that.
The first problem is that “KJV-only” means different things to different people. Some churches take an aggressive stance that makes them “more KJV-only” than other churches. For example, many churches would never ascribe “inspiration” to the KJV itself, insisting that it’s only “preserved,” yet would bristle at the idea that someone would consider them “less KJV-only” than another church that takes a more aggressive stance (for example, that the KJV itself represents inspiration). So, instead of trying to find a hard and fast identifier (or mailing a huge questionnaire to every church that wants a listing), we just made things simpler and try to accurately indicate what each church publicly believes based on their publically-available information.
The second and probably more practical reason is simple: if people know that your church is (or isn’t) a KJV-only church, they’ll be able to make their decisions more easily. A solidly KJV-only church isn’t likely to be visited by an individual who sincerely doesn’t believe the KJV to be the only English Bible, and a KJV believer isn’t going to visit a non-KJV church if that information is available to him. That helps the non-KJV churches not have visitors that mistakenly assume they’re KJV-only, and it helps church seekers not assume that a church has simply not yet been listed on our site and it turns out that they’re not KJV.
We’re sorry that we can’t make everyone happy or cater to the minutiae of every believer out there. We are simply trying to create the most accurate, comprehensive, and useful independent Baptist and KJV Bible-believing church database in the world. Please help us out, for everyone’s benefit. Feel free to drop us a line if you have any questions." - KJVchurches.com
All of you naysayers on the KJB ,remember you will all appear at the Judgment Seat Of Christ or The Great White Throne Judgment
That applies to you as well remember when the Pharisees accused Jesus of casting out demons from the father of demons and he warned them about blaspheming the Holy Spirit which is the unforgivable sin and that is my friend calling something that God or the Holy Spirit has done false or evil so I hope you are taking that into consideration when you talk about other Bible translations the way you do
True. But I won’t be covered in the pages of the KJV, but rather the righteousness of Christ.
Have seen pastor say he can see Jesus in all the versions and boasts about how he purposely uses various version weekly and points this out in his sermons; this is why I left the church, that and the many bizarre interpretations he would make which were easily overturned by the word itself. Things like saying Jesus spoke in parables because they were a very common way of speaking back then and were easily understood; WHAT!/? Ofcourse this is not true, at all or in any way either, the disciples themselves asked Him why He was speaking to the people the masses in parables alone and He told them in Mt 13:10-17 that He was doing it to conceal truth from them! Parables are in fact riddles, see Ezekiel 17:2 KJVo . We know & are friends with many still there who hear nothing that troubles them. I think they are brain dead, actually.
Cant hear him
He lost me when he said he was not KJV only. One can use a modern translation for the purpose of proving how inaccurate the modern translations are.
King James Only is often used with the belief that KJV has superceded the textus receptus so the KJV is some sort of newer revelation superior to the textus receptus. Peter Ruckman used the KJV to correct the textus receptus rather than the other way around. People who believe in the textus receptus rather than the KJV can allow for new translations of the textus receptus such as nkjv and MEV. People who believe in the textus receptus rather than the KJV will translate from textus receptus into foreign languages such as chinese. People who are King James Only might insist that foreign language bibles should be translated from the KJV rather than the textus receptus.
Peter Ruckman was not correct in all of his decisions as he was a human. Whenever you try to correct the Bible in ANY fashion, you have put yourself above the knowledge of God.
And also in regards to translating from the KJV into Nepalese/Chinese/somelanguage is the problem that you have to understand those languages in order to do that accurately. I don't think in Greek and Hebrew so all I know is the KJV and if the Chinese doesn't contradict or differ from the KJV when compared.
That is an absurd claim as the TR was not named or called so until 1633 by two brothers who were printers.
The NKJV & MEV are totally corrupt and can not be trusted; only the KJV can be trusted.
The KJV is drawn from the TR. Did you know since 1966 agreement with the Vatican and UBS all new language translations have been from the Vatican approved UBS Critical Text. The leave of Mt 13:33 is throughout today and is corrupting thoroughly.
The introduction of the NKJV says it used the Alexandrian text not the RT for its changes. The source text for the KJV ws the source text for all modern translations until the UBS Vatican concord in 1966, from 67 on ALL modern versions use the Alexandrian sourced text of the Vatican, even ALL the primary protestant and Baptist orgs have signed onto this concord.
@@Obediah002 both nkjv and mev are translated from the received text. The nkjv lists the differences with the majority text and the differences with the critical text in the notes.
@@colonyofcells nope, that is the claim but not the truth, at all. Only the KJV translators were faithful too thee word, the very words they were translating; ALL the moderns are not but are "trying" to get at the meaning of the words as they understand them which strips the Spirit from the word(s). See Proverbs 25:2 KJV of course.
It means that 1. They have not studied the issue out. & 2. If they have, they are a compromiser and need the money, people and popularity that comes from being a compromising preacher. 3. They are Laodicean in theology an practice.
The kjv has mistranslations, the word hell (place of eternal torment) is nowhere found in the Hebrew and Greek......Sheol, Hades and Gehenna have different meanings but the translators translated it into the word hell (things that are different are not the same.....study to shew yourself approved unto God 2 Tim. 2 15
No, its hell.
The worldly vitriol based upon deceptions and outright lies against the KJB verifies my belief that it must be the faithfully preserved Words of God in the English language. Before attacking that which one is ignorant about, I urge all to view my entire playlist concerning the subject here: th-cam.com/play/PLHXyOw2HNMMpTpAdfIbkDo3iBoUCXhZYh.html
The KJV his at least 2 mistranslaations. Isaiah 14:12 should not be Lucifer. It should be morning star or day star. Lucifer came from the Latin Vulgate. Acts 12:4 should be Passover not Easter. Easter didnt exist when the Greek was written.
2 Peter 1:19 KJV
We have also a more sure word of prophecy; whereunto ye do well that ye take heed, as unto a light that shineth in a dark place, until the day dawn, and the day star arise in your hearts:
No, the KJV is fine. It's just that the PERversions want to conflate Jesus and the devil.
@@tbuitendykYou can believe that, but the Hebrew word means daystar or morning star. Lucifer is Latin. Erasmas brought it over from the Vulgate. It means light bearer.
Dear Dr. Zeinner & Gentle Reader, the King James Version translators were not King James Only.
The King James translators declared: "we do not deny, nay, we affirm and avow, that the very meanest translation of the Bible in English set forth by men of our profession ... containeth the word of God, nay, is the word of God"
The King James Version translators also stated that: "variety of translations is profitable for the finding out of the sense of the Scriptures."
Source: The Translators to the Reader: Preface to the King James Version
errrr.......Helooooooooo The Preface was not and is not the translated Word of God..........Those Translators were not faced with HUNDREDS of translations as we are today.........don't you get it? They were referring to just a handful of translations available to them.............Stop trying to grasp at straws by reading snatches of the preface. Try and come to the point where you are in agreement with 1 Cor 14;33 " For GOD is not the Author of confusion."
Upwards of a thousand translations...........is confusion............
They also said that their goal was not to make a bad translation good, but a good one better...or out of many good ones, ONE PRINCIPAL GOOD ONE NOT JUSTLY TO BE ACCEPTED AGAINST.
There is no issue about that......Of course, the KJV Translators compared Bibles; Tyndale,Wycliffe, Geneva. Bishops and others, what does that prove...........I can assure you they would in no way countenance the ridiculous Bible Babble Buffet that pervades today......upwards of 900 + translations......a traversty. that dishonours the GOD of the Bible, the one who says he is NOT the Author of confusion............but thats fine, if you want to spend your life in perpetual text comparison, commentary review and revision with NO Bible as a complete authority.......go ahead, live the dream, but know this, Psalm 119;89 says that the word is SETTLED in Heaven and guess what,God has settled his word on Earth too........ keep up!
stuart west Amen
Its hard to debate against man made doctrines.
Dr. Zeinner quotes from Romans 16. Was the Apostle Paul "King James Only"? He wrote the letter to the Romans over 1,500 years before 1611/1769. Per Romans 14, the Apostle Paul wrote that one must not judge another over doubtful disputations.
You amaze me......have you read scripture? .......Try Psalm 139,14-16 God has placed within each one of us the BOOK of DNA .......letters, words, full stops...........Surely you know that if just 1 letter in your book is 'wrong' you will be in real trouble.....mutation.......disease.......early death. All laid out in God's Book......I can hear you choking on your cornflakes in laughter.........why not check out Proverbs 30 ; 5................
The King James Bible has outsold into the BILLIONS all other translations. it has remained doctrinally the same of 400 + years.........your modern Bibles will come and go, changing, revising, updating,......the old book will carry on......clearly Blessed by God
Nah Brian, he changed every 20 years or so when the new versions came out. Whatever was trending.
Your statement is deceitful. The question is over the Greek that underlies the KJB and the corrupted Greek backing all new versions to one extent or another.
I read only the King James Bible, but may I impose upon you to realize that the King James is not a translation, but a VERSION. It is only a Version of another Bible. ..It is the KJV King James VERSION...A Translation is when you take the Greek and Hebrew and Translate it into a completely new Translation of the Bible ..It is not a version of something else. It May well be different than the King James Version. Is it right or wrong...That is for you and the Holy Ghost to decide.
They did take the Greek and Hebrew and translate it into the English, so it is a English version translation, no!
I understand the KJV is %80 or so the Bishops Bible, they simply improved on the %20, and still we can find palces where they missed it but have curiously found those places are guided, overseen by the HS as He has concealed knowledge/understanding in these places. It is my personal opinion the KJV is the last refinement by the HS of the text of His preserved word, have found Him in the very words of the text and have not once found Him in any of the modern Alexandrian sourced texts.
@@Obediah002 Plus italics.
Ignorance, unbelievable. The KJV translators, translated.
It means you are not caught up in some Idolatrous cult.
Martin Baker Martin, maybe you aren't recognizing the right of KJO individuals to believe exactly what they purport. I myself am not KJO but there is a lot of compelling evidence that "modern" translations may be problematic. These translations are gradually diluting and redacting scripture. Also is the diminution of the identity and authority of Jesus Christ. Take care and God bless.
Dear Ms. Smith,
Grace unto you, and peace, be multiplied.
Please provide some of the "compelling evidence". Please provide examples of the dilution & redacting of scripture, as well as diminution of identity & authority of Jesus Christ. Thank you.
A KJO individual is free and welcome to believe. How are Dr. Zeinner & the KJBRC organization recognizing the right of non-KJO individuals?
We can bare your name calling ..........our only crime is to believe that God has according to his promises, given us a perfect word............it seems that you on the other hand believe in bibles like the NIV which has 64,000 words missing against the old book......you remember the old book, the one that has remains unchanged for 400 years, published into the billions, more in demand than any of the 'Johnnie come lately versions' which if want to collect will require a lot of shelving as there are many hundreds of them and they still keep coming...........
Dear Mr. West,
God's blessings to you & yours.
Name calling? KJO? If that is name calling, i will not use. I followed the title of the video.
Assuming that the "old book" refers to the KJV: I disagree with the claim that the KJV remains unchanged for 400 years. The KJV has been revised several times since 1611. The 1611 KJV is not the same as the 1769 KJV. For example, the 1769KJV omits (thankfully) the apocrypha found in the 1611 old book.
You are welcome to your old book. May you be blessed by it as i have.
Please name 1 doctrine that was changed from 1611 to 1769?
I used to be KJVO, just wasn't dogmatic about it. Then I got tired of having to figure out what the archaic words mean, let alone the archaic idioms. Yes, it can be done and is done with a Strongs exhaustive concordance and a Webster's 1828 dictionary. But it's just a lot easier to use the NKJV or the MEV. The KJVer is a good KJV update that has verse by verse footnotes with the updated words and idioms which make it much easier to understand what you read & it might be OK with the KJVOists.
The NKJV AND MEV HAVE EXACT SAME ERRORS AS THE REST OF THE MODERNS BTW; YOU NEED OT LOOK UP THESE VERSES AND UNDERSTAND EXACTLY WHAT KJVo MEANS!
@@Obediah002 As to the "missing verses" the NKJV and MEV don't have any. If they do, list them.
@@davidbrock4104 If you want to understand the problems with the MEV listen carefully to this link, very eye opening it is. th-cam.com/video/yHPPNK9ixtU/w-d-xo.html
@@davidbrock4104 Never said any verses are missing only changed, same as all the modern Alexandrian sourced bibles, all full of changes and this includes the NKJV. Heres one of those changes from, 1 COR 1:18 MEV "being saved" KJV "are saved, " and you can compare a lot more verses with same changes from the KJV that as this one does affects sound doctrine. Books have been written and continue to be written showing how corrupt these moderns are compared to the KJV.
@@Obediah002 1 Corinthians 1:18 YLT
for the word of the cross to those indeed perishing is foolishness, and to us -- those being saved -- it is the power of God,
It's not just modern versions using "being saved"
What it means to not be KJV only? Means you have not fallen for an idolatrous heretical cult
Lies, not all people who trust the KJV is part of the KJVONLY cult. If you read other versions you are just not getting the pure word, but there is some truth in those other versions as much as they adhered to the Textus Receptus, but we know many false versions do not. It matters not what version we read IF we don't take the time to read it at all. Having a KJV means nothing if you are not being doers of the Holy Word of God. God bless.
James 1:22-25 kjv
22. But be ye doers of the word, and not hearers only, deceiving your own selves.
23. For if any be a hearer of the word, and not a doer, he is like unto a man beholding his natural face in a glass:
24. For he beholdeth himself, and goeth his way, and straightway forgetteth what manner of man he was.
25. But whoso looketh into the perfect law of liberty, and continueth therein, he being not a forgetful hearer, but a doer of the work, this man shall be blessed in his deed.
@@ToOpen6seven Any body can quote the scripture to try and justify the KJV only cult. The Sadducees quoted scripture But as Jesus pointed out they did not know the scripture or the power of God. If you were a true bible believer rather than a KJV only cultist. You would know that all truth is found in the Lord Jesus Christ. Not in some archaic imperfect uninspired translation like the KJV. In fact your comment makes it clear that you are a cultist. By placing the KJV above the throne of God. Which means you have added a man made tradition to the finished work of Christ. That is another gospel and another gospel is the spirit of divination or witchcraft. You have absolutely nothing that a true believer in Christ has. A true believer that has not fallen for the KJV only deception. You do know that the KJV translators knew their work was not perfect. They said even the meanest translation is still the word of God. The KJV only cult in their delusions pride and arrogance are calling them liars. It Is impossible for you to prove from scripture that the KJV is so called true word of God in English. So many words have changed meaning making the KJV even more inaccurate. Strange that the KJV only cultists never speak in KJV English. Yet these hypocrites try to confine Almighty God to this translation. That is absolute idolatry. Mistranslations like Easter instead of Passover. Calling the Holy Spirit an it four times denying his deity. Latin words like Lucifer borrowed from the Latin Vulgate showing the Catholic influence on the KJV, instead of the more accurate morning star or day star. No Latin word should be in an English translation. Also it is nothing to do with Satan but a prophecy about the king of Babylon who sought to exalt himself above the throne of God. Like the KJV only cult do with their idol. Satan has truly used deceivers and liars of the KJV only cult to sow discord in the body of Christ. Liars and false teachers like professional liar Gail Riplinger. Mike Hoggard with his numerology like Gail Riplinger's so called acrostic algebra. Total witchcraft. Will Kinney incapable of rational thought. Who calls any non KJV cultists. Bible agnostics. So according to his loopy logic the KJV transports were "Bible agnostics". Sam Gipp who said a Russian must learn English to have the true word of God. Not just any old English but the archaic English of the KJV. Hate preacher Steven Anderson who shows no fruit of the Holy Spirit. But all the vile and rotten fruit of the KJV only cult. Never mind he is KJV only, suppose that makes him holy Gene Kim who calls all the excellent more accurate modern translations "Satan's bibles" . How can Satan cast out Satan? That means he is blaspheming the Holy Spirit. Because God is blessing and using the modern translations to bring many to Christ. The late Jack Hyles heretic and KJV only cultist. Who claimed that anybody who heard the gospel from any version other than the KJV. Were born of Satan. The circular reasoning of KJV only cultist David W Daniels full of conspiracy theories. KJV onlyism is without a doubt a false teaching a cult and a cancer, from the pit of hell. That has not only left reasoning behind, but has left sanity behind. Who needs atheists when Satan has the KJV only cult spreading his lies
@@ToOpen6sevenNobody is getting the "pure word of God" reading the KJV. You can quote as many verses you like to try and justify the KJV only deception. But no scripture supports the indefensible unbilical man made tradition of KJV onlyism.