Proof that the Textus Receptus & Traditional Text preceeds the Critical Text (Westcott & Hort)!
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 25 ก.พ. 2019
- Did you ever read wonder why for example in Luke 4.4 it says: "Some newer less reliable manuscripts added the words: "But by every mouth that preceeds out of the mouth of God""? Then you are 'a victim of the critical modern text!
Proof that the Textus Receptus & Traditional Text preceeds the Critical Text (Nestle Aland/Westcott & Hort/Alexandrian manuscripts)!
-Must See documentary: "A Lamp In The Dark - The Untold History Of The Bible"
-426 differences between the Traditional Text/Textus Receptus and the Critical Text: docs.google.com/document/d/1n...
-My whole list of citations of the traditional text from the early church fathers: docs.google.com/document/d/1B...
-The Ante-Nicene Fathers, The Writings of the Fathers Down to A.D. 325, Volume 1-10, year 1867: drive.google.com/file/d/1qxkw...
How to search for citations for yourself? Use Gaaiho Reader, open the "Basic" tab, click "Index", then "Embedded Index", click "Create". Then you can use the "Search" function, and ALL of the places it is found is found instantly. Voila!
Another helpful resource where you can look up any NT verse and see early church citations : earlychristianwritings.com/e-catena/
Why are not doing in English
I like what you're doing. We need a solid foundation with which to stand up for every doctrine - and depth within it - that only the KJV offers in English. You don't have to be scholarly to trust Jesus, so I think that reasoning applies to how we view the KJV. If there are minor mistakes, they are very minor and mans is at fault for that. But the Holy Spirit is aware of the process of time to get us from the myriad of English bible's: like the Bishop's or Geneva, to the AV1611, to the 1769 standardized version that we see today. So I think it's perfect. The Geneva has "straining out a gnat", the AV1611 and 1769KJV has "straining at a gnat". The Holy Spirit has a sense of humor if you will because I picture all of us with huge eyeballs and magnifying glasses arguing about things we no longer have control of, (the details of history). We can control our obedience to the great commission, even though I strongly believe unity is established from pure doctrine that comes from pure trust in the pure word of God, that I also have only found in the KJB. On another note, if we trust God's signature is on the KJV, and we strain at the life of King James, we see a huge part of it in the entire life of the Stuart Kings from James I to James II, Charles I, and II, this completes the Stuart Kings. This includes the Trail of Charles I, which has numbers and statements I find fascinating: m.th-cam.com/video/OPDpj59kkgk/w-d-xo.html . God used subtleties in their lives that reflect the Gospel and other things, we find mirror imaging in the bible like we see in the Stuarts: James I, James II, Charles I, Charles II.... Charles I is executed similarly like Jesus was, King Charles II came back from exile and avenged his throne and secured or set up, his kingdom. Mother of King James I was Mary, a catholic, who was beheaded, some say by "the Virgin Queen", Elizabeth I, who was accused of being a protestant. Was God saying Protestants hold the Truth over Catholics? King James I became king of all of Great Britain after gaining the throne of his mother Mary of Scotland and England from Elizabeth. God used fallible people but left a whole lot of breadcrumbs. I haven't even mentioned that in these last days we are dealing with the death of Queen Elizabeth II - who is the Methuselah of Queens and Charles the III who some say is more like the anti-Charles of Charles the Ist . Sorry for the length but you only had one comment, so consider this 20 of them in one place. I'm grateful the translators used Italics to every spot they needed to convey English to, it shows they didn't want to hide anything from the King or people. I strongly suggest people read the Preface to the KJB that the scholars put in the bibles before the 1769KJV, it is very enlightening and shows how the culture of the day spoke and how they made choices to translate the best they could. In other words, they showed their fallible humanity. Have a very good day! God bless!
I’ve never seen a better defense than this with evidence for every attacked verse. Thank you so much!
Quote from Martin Luther:
No greater mischief can happen to a Christian people, than to have God's Word taken from them, or falsified, so that they no longer have it pure and clear. God grant we and our descendants be not witnesses of such a calamity.
A absolutely fantastic presentation!!! If we had only the critical texts, and no traditional texts, the Reformation would not have occurred. We'd all be praying to Mary instead of the Lord Jesus! The critical text "Scolars," if they're truly saved, owe their salvation to the Traditional Texts! They might as well be Catholics for the things they believe. I'm, thankfully, a protestant... thanks to a Bible preserved for 2000 years. :-)
Why do you think we would be praying to Marz if only the critical text existed?
This needs more views. Excellent work
Thanks! Please share!
@@KongebarnCan you send the project link? I'm sick of people insulting the KJV. Please!
@@Kongebarn As almost 67 years of being a KJV only reader and teacher of the scriptures I ran across a Bible called the KJVER. Have you seen or studied that bible. It does seem to just remove some of the thee’ and thou’s and not mess with the text like the NKJV does. Could you give it a review for an opinion say for younger KJV readers.
Thank you brother for this elaborate video, may God continue to preserve the Word and spread it. Blessings in Christ from Spain
Sinaiticus was written in 1840 by Constantine Simonides.
The Vaticanus was found in the Pope's library in 1475.
Check out David W. Daniels on the Chicktracts channel. He has done extensive research research on the Sinaiticus Text. More research than anyone I've ever heard of. Check out his books as well.
Eramarus was a Catholic priest The Catholic & Ortrodox Helped put together the Bible People could not read or write back in them time's many Catholic Monks hand written the Scripture's before the printing press Luther wanted to remain Catholic Facts.Catholics we believe Christ Saves We Honor Mary & the saints in Heaven but Christ Saves Saint Peter Christ wanted him to Start a Church Over 2,000+ year's Muslims Kings Emperor's Hertical people tried to Destroy Christ Church But the Catholic & Ortrodox still stand ! Christ said to Simon Peter do you love me & said feed my Lambs tend my sheep📖🙏🛐💯 Catholic Any Question Catholic answers Has books the Bible proves the teachings of the Catholic church Jimmy Aikins Debate vs Lutheran many people at Catholic answers are ex Prostestants & even some ex Ortrodox Russian Greek & Jewish 📖🙏🛐💯 Catholic God bless
Thanks, I have watched his videos and am reading the history now.
@@frankperrella1202 thanks. I am slowly learning to parse the TEXTUS RECEPTUS and may never complete that task. Only GOD knows.
@@frankperrella1202 most of the Proto-Protestants and Reformers were catholic priests. Something you don’t understand is that they all worked in defiance of Rome. Get that please. Even Erasmus was hurried in a Protestant graveyard as an insult because of it.
@@mresab1997 Original Prostestants like the Anglicans believe have Christ Sacraments like the Catholic & Eastern Orthodox churches, Like John 20:21-23-23 Confession) Baptism John 3:5) The Eucharist John 6:51-58- Lk 22:19-20; Ointing of the Sick James 5:14-15 Mk 1:32-34 & Confirmation Lk 24:49; Acts 8:14-17 & Holy orders 2 Tm 1:6; Titus 1:5-9 & of Course Matrimony John 2:1-12) Numerous Church Father's Prostestants site the deeper they did they either become Catholic or Eastern Orthodox many ex top Prostestant Scholars. We all believe Christ saves. St Paul warns that it's not easy he said to follow Christ & the road is narrow. 🙏🛐✝️🗝️🗝️
Thank you sir, for all the time you invested in this work. It it clear that this study took a great deal of careful research. It is a wonderful inductive study confirming the promise of the the Lord Jesus Christ, who stated that God would providentially control and thus safeguard the textual transmission of His Word. Matthew 5:17-18.
Thank you for this careful straight forward explanation of what the crux of the whole English Bible translation issue is all about, and WHY simply, and CLEARLY the texts used for the Authorized Version are the safest and most reliable texts we have. Do you have any books that you might recommend on this topic? Or others who have also done quality videos such the one you've done? Thank you and God bless you for the diligence you've put into this.
Excellent study, thank you. You have explained it very clearly in an easy to understand manner. I am saving this to show others that I know who prefer the modern translations and believe they are superior to the KJV.
GREAT JOB! I am sharing this on my church channel and adding it to my apologetical playlist. Very good job!
I will be putting out something similar this week, and I am going to be using your information as a source.
This is great thank you. I just recently ran across all abhorrent things about Wescott and Hort being into mysticism and contacting the dead, even forming a mystic group. I’m now pretty much convinced to only study from Kjv and Nkjv, Kjver, kjv21 and Akjv.
You might want to research a little further as far as anything but the King James version… Is the new King James version also is corrupted. Blessings in your journey.
I would avoid the NKJV also as it is somewhat diminished. Compare Matthew 7:14 also
Great job on this video. Will be sharing this with others! Thanks, God bless you!
You're Awesome brother! God bless you for your labor!
Thank you for doing this comparison. A very good presentation to point other interested people to
Excellent work , thank you brother because I have come upon this and your video confirmed what the Holy Spirit has been impressing upon my heart. God bless you brother ! Thank you 🙏
Thank you! God will use what you have shared this coming Wednesday night! Thank you!!!!
Bill
Excellent video! There are many claims made against the KJV, or the Masoretic and TR, and when I research them, I see that none of them hold weight.
God bless!
Excellent work .. A blessing for our need of knowing the truth behind alexandrian texts...
This is absolutely the best presentation on this topic. Well done protecting the Word of God brother 👑
also great to hear the Norwegian perspective of translations. I have several bibles I take when I go to church so I can point out exactly what you have said. many times the pastor does not appreciate it but oh well .
Excellent presentation. Great research. Thank you. Blessings in Christ Jesus.
Perfect working!! Congratulations!!
Excellent content brother! Thank you for spreading the word. Literally, the beautiful words of God…
Very well done thank you. Extremely helpful.
Amen Bro. and thank you for making this. More info has come out about the so-called oldest codex's. These books are very good.
"Was Codex Sinaiticus written in 1840?", by Jack Moorman
"Neither oldest Nor best", by David Sorenson
"Is the worlds oldest Bible a fake", by David Daniels
"Who faked the worlds oldest Bible", by David Daniels
Calm voice, solid facts and great message. You are a blessing.
Very good presentation, I'm going to use it on facebook, and send to some friends.
I do appreciate this video, thank you! I do have a comment on your mention of dispensationalism: Grace was present in the skins provided by God for covering.
Yeah the bible says the righteousness of God is revealed from faith to faith. From the faith of Abraham, who preceded the law, to the faith of Moses, who by faith left royalty behind for God's promise. Hebrews 11 shows us it's always been about faith in God.
Thank you very much for the hard work and resources. Although I believe in Covenant Theology and not Dispensationalism. Praise God for the love of His Pure Word.
Thank you for your work.
Very powerful presentation. I certainly will make copy and study them so that I can be armed with the truth when encountering the counterfeits.
The critical text is on N/A version 28 already and will constantly change forever, Modern Text Critics freely admit that their reconstruction efforts will NEVER be complete since all Autographs for comparisons are lost. So, in essence the CT is a forever changing text creating nothing more than doubt! Almost all modern text critics are unbelievers (although academics) and certainly do not believe in Inspiration and Preservation.
The revision revised by Dean Burgon is a must have for your library
One thing about the TR is that it emphasizes the biblical and ancient practice of Isopsephy or what we commonly know as Gematria. Which is the simple method of allocating numbers to letters to form mathematical equations in any given language. We can see this very evidently in Revelation 7:4 with the number 144,000 being described as ρμδ to write out 144,000 instead of what many modern Greek NT's put instead is ἑκατὸν τεσσεράκοντα τέσσαρες χιλιάδες and completely getting rid of the original text! The "Scholars" of so called "Higher and Textual Criticism" have completely erased a biblical doctrine and ancient practice in the process and on purpose all to combat the TR? All this sound new to you? Well guess what... alphanumerics proves that the Reformers had the right line of manuscripts and were working on some incredibly old stuff. Math doesnt lie.
Spot on videos from Brandon Peterson web site Truth is Christ goes into this in great detail.
Excellent work!
Great video. Thank you 👍
ya, I have not watched the video.... but after reading the comments subscribed to the channel. I am sure I will spend a lot of time here in the future.
An excellent book, 'the eccesiastical text, by Theodore Letis', defends the recieved text so well. Thank you for your research.
Are you a member of the Ecclesiastical Church?
Thanks so much for this video on the true identity of our bible. Before salvation, I was an atheist and had to know if the bible was the word of God and which textual stream was the real one. I currently have a brother who is asking the same questions and so I sent him your video. I knew that Norway always had one bible and they were a unified church...such a blessing! Here in North America we have been deluged by many translations and the critical text. In your video you mention the importance of "fundamentalism." My eschatology was fundamentalist futurism for many years, but found it rather confusing and depressing. A few years ago, I decided to really dig into the eschatology issue and studied every view out there but as I went along I kept coming back to the teaching of "Preterism" because it clearly answered so many of the questions that fundamentalist eschatology had no answer for. Essentially, Preterism stands on three pillars of interpretation: audience relevance, time stamps and allow scripture to interpret scripture. In short, it opened up my bible to me and gave me truly the "Good News." I would humbly ask that you would give David Curtis a listen (see link below). He is an excellent expository preacher who has been a Preterist for over 20 years. Before that he was an ardent fundamentalist and his eschatology was futurist. Here is one of his teachings on "end times." God bless! th-cam.com/video/_s1mOSjz7As/w-d-xo.html
Thanks for the link, I've been interested in researching Preterism. I do like the serious Scriptural approach that view takes, but it also seems to overly spiritualize sections of Matthew 24 because a WHOLE bunch of stuff in there doesn't seem to have occurred in AD 70. However, I still want to do more research!
@@breese50 Thank you for replying to my post in your comment section. My desire to understand the truth regarding "end times" put me in the "full preterist" position, not because of whim or fancy but a diligent inquiry into every aspect of this position. There are, of course certain individuals within the movement that create confusion on the subject; usually in secondary aspects. The "audience relevance," and "time stamps" kept me anchored while I critically scrutinized all the material. One of the most intriguing facets of this study were the writings of Josephus who was contemporary to the destruction of the temple in 70 A.D. His description of the temple is very interesting. Here are his comments:
Josephus, Ant. Bk. 1, chapter 7, 7 (p. 180-181; also see 90-91) - Josephus says that the Temple and even the garments of the priest represented LAND, SEA and, HEAVEN.
Whiston, Josephus Antiquities, Bk. 3, chapter 6:4, (P. 87)- “However, this proportion of the measures of the tabernacle proved to be an imitation of the system of the world: for the third part thereof which was within the four pillars, to which the priests were not admitted, is, as it were, a Heaven peculiar to God; but the space of the twenty cubits, is, as it were, sea and land, on which men live, and so this is peculiar to the priests only…”
Antiquities, Bk. 3, Chpt 7:7- (p. 90)- The veils too, which were composed of four things, they declared the four elements; for the fine linen was proper to signify the earth, because flax grows out of the earth; the purple signified the sea, because the color is dyed by the blood of the sea shell fish; the blue is fit to signify the air…; And for the ephod, it showed that God had made the universe of four (elements)… the breastplate was made to resemble the earth, the girdle represented the ocean, the Sardonxes the sun and moon, the twelve stones the months…”
Josephus, Whiston, Ant. Bk. 3, chapter 6, 4 (87, p. 123) The Temple was “an imitation of the systems of the world. The rest was sea and land” Thus, the Temple was “heaven and earth.”
When we honestly consider this Jewish concept of the Temple, it is little wonder that when Jesus predicted the destruction of that City and Temple, the disciples immediately connected that impending disaster with the “end of the age!”
Having read the above quotes it becomes amazingly clear that Jesus was not talking about some event in the far future but something that was to happen very soon, in fact He said it would occur in their generation. The destruction of the temple and end of the law and it's sacrifices (the rudiments, the stoikia) were burned up in 70 A.D.
"But when YOU see Jerusalem surrounded by armies, YOU will know that her desolation is near.Then let those who are in Judea flee to the mountains, let those in the city get out, and let those in the country stay out of the city. For THESE ARE THE DAYS of vengeance, TO FULFILL ALL THAT IS WRITTEN." Luke 21:20-22
Again, I would refer you to David Curtis, pastor of the Berean Bible Church. His TH-cam channel has virtually twenty years of material on Full Preterism. He is a careful expository preacher. I must say that I do not believe in his "cessationist" position regarding the Holy Spirit and the gifts.
There are many individuals on the web who are attempting to teach full preterism, but he does the best.
God bless
@@gloryman3634 thanks for the information. Can you help me clarify the definition - Full Preterism believes that all of Jesus' prophecies about Jerusalem/end of the age are fulfilled (it seems). Does the view also believe that all of Revelation was completely fulfilled as well? I guess I would ask when the Millennium/Christ's reign takes place, or the second coming. Are those still future events?
@@breese50 Yes. By definition Full Preterism is the teaching that all things written by the law and the prophets were fulfilled right up to and including the destruction of the temple in 70 A.D. The Revelation, including the millennium, is actually a divorce proceeding between Christ and apostate Israel who, by the law, bust be stoned and burned.
The Revelation of John is probably the most difficult writings in the entire Bible. When trying to come to terms with its interpretation, I did quite a bit of listening and reading. Essentially, there are two foundational principles that give us helpful guidance. First there are the "time stamps" that are at the beginning and end:
At the beginning: “This is the revelation of Jesus Christ, which God gave Him to show His servants what MUST SOON COME TO PASS. Blessed is the one who reads aloud the words of this prophecy, and blessed are those who hear and obey what is written in it, BECAUSE THE TIME IS NEAR” Revelation 1:1a, 3
And at the end in the last chapter. “Then he told me, “DO NOT SEAL UP THE WORDS OF THE PROPHECY IN THIS BOOK, BECAUSE THE TIME IS NEAR.” “Behold, I AM COMING SOON.” “He who testifies to these things says, “Yes, I AM COMING SOON.” Amen. Revelation 22:10, 12, 20
The second principle is "audience relevance." In verse four of chapter one John says: "to the seven churches which are in Asia." This is who the letter is written to and Jesus gets very specific when addressing these seven churches. There is no evidence through out the letter that any one else is included. All interpretation regarding its application to some time in the far future is pure speculation.
There is one other interesting aspect to the Revelation (also through out the New Testament) and that is the Greek word "mello" meaning "about " which often
gets mistranslated in our English bibles. Here is one example from Revelation 12:5 where this word "mello" is used:
Rev 12:5 - "And she gave birth to a son, a male child, who is [ABOUT] to rule all the nations with a rod of iron; and her child was caught up to God and His throne."
It is clearly about Jesus who was caught up to God and His throne in heaven, not on the earth.
Here is a link to a fine article that deals with the Greek word "mello" and its usage in the New Testament:
www.gracecentered.com/christian_forums/preterist-forum/greek-mello-a-dangerous-word-to-futurists-and-partial-preterists/
Though not directly connected to the Revelation of John it supports the imminency of the soon coming of Christ to those who were alive at the time the epistles were written. Her is one example from the second epistle to Timothy:
2 Tim. 4:1 - "I solemnly charge you in the presence of God and of Christ Jesus, who is [about-"mello"] to judge the living and the dead, and by His "appearing" and
His kingdom." Here we a have the "judgement, Christ's imminent return and with that His kingdom all in one verse and it was about to happen in their life time.
In closing...the comment section of TH-cam is not the best place to go into detail on subjects like John's Revelation. One of the best resources on the Preterist
position around is "The Parouisa" by James Stewart Russell. It is available on the web and can still be purchased in hard copy. He does go verse by verse through
the whole bible including Revelation Here is the PDF link: www.preteristcentral.com/pdf/pdf%20books/1878_russel_parousia.pdf
Hope you continue to persevere in the study of Preterism, it will be worth it. It opened my bible up to me in such a wonderful way. God bless!
@@breese50 David Curtis's TH-cam video on Revelation is a good introduction:
Part 1
th-cam.com/users/results?search_query=david+curtis+revelation+part+1
Part 2
th-cam.com/video/W2OoLOgaqcs/w-d-xo.html
A very good work thanks!
Awesome video!!!
yes very good. thanks for all the info and the research.
Some of the Byzantine texts go back to the 4th century. They have been used by Greek speaking people since that time. Thousands of copies were made. These copies are in a high degree of agreement. This is how God has preserved His Word.
The modern claim that the original text was lost is not based on fact.
A really good video.
That's one of my Bible verses I use in my Bible studies.
Thou shall keep them O Lord.... from this generation forever
NKJV is my favorite
Pretty good work. You should put together a research paper and publish it if possible.
Awesome Work!!!!!!!! Thank!
Great video!
Hi, can you please provide a source for the claim that the Waldensians had a text as far back as 120AD? From all that I can find they were named after Peter Waldo (Valdo, or Valdes) from 12th century France.I can't find anything backing their being around earlier than that.
Awesome, thank you!
thanks for a solid info ...in spanish the most popular (for non- catholics)and used Bible is the Reina- Valera 1960; wich is a revision from the "Biblia del oso" (Bible of the bear) made by Casiodoro de Reina in 1569 and later revised by Cipriano de Valera in 1602, and it has many revisions througout the time...the problem I´ve found with the 1960 revision is that, although Biblical societies claims that they used Textus Receptus for its revision, when you compare it with an older version, you can easly see that is leaned towards the critical text, and it has the same translation and changes like the modern ones!!!..many are against spanish versions of NIV, NLT, NASB, etc... but what they don´t realize is that the Reina-Valera 1960 is pretty much alike to those new versions...that's why now I use KJV and Reina Valera 1602 purificada (purified version) wich are faithful to the majority texts....
Thank you for this.
Nice citations.
LOL I dont know if I have commented here before but this video is great every time Im going to do a study of this I always go back to this video. This is such an inportant point in Christianity. Thank you and God Bless
Hey Kongebarn - this is awesome work - thank you! Let me ask you a question:
Should we "make disciples of all nations" or "teach all nations" (Matthew 28:19)
I have also been researching the history of the differences in the Great Commission. Every Bible I could find published before 1885 including the Vulgate reads "teach all nations" so I went back further to the church fathers, but the trick is in the translation. They wrote in Greek, and those two phrases are translated from the same word. Therefore, if a quotation of the church father was printed prior to 1885 it seems it's translated as "teach" whereas a more recently printed book it is now translated as "make disciples". Have you done any research on this topic? I wonder if the failure of the Western church is primarily due to the obsession with "making disciples" (converts) and a loss of emphasis on "teaching".
Blessings!
Yes, much like the removal and/or change of the word "study" to "correctly handles", as found in 2 Timothy 2:15 "Study to shew thyself approved unto God, a workman that needeth not to be ashamed, rightly dividing the word of truth." And the word "corrupt" in 2 Corinthians 2:17 "For we are not as many, which corrupt the word of God: but as of sincerity, but as of God, in the sight of God speak we in Christ." to "peddle", which is exactly what these so-called Bible publishers actually do. All MV's change many important words of God's Holy infallible Writ.
along with major doctrines, thus fulfilling a prophecy of a famine for hearing the word of God, during these last days of apostasy, evil and great wickedness, as written in Amos 8:11 Behold, the days come, saith the Lord GOD, that I will send a famine in the land, not a famine of bread, nor a thirst for water, but of hearing the words of the LORD:
God bless
Hi. Check out the guide in the description and you can check yourself + this link earlychristianwritings.com/e-catena/
Thanks brother
Thank you!
this issue is very important, the issue of *which text* of the NT we are to follow... the debate of the Byzantine/TR text vs the Alexandrian text and the implications seen in modern Bible versions, will surely continue, and the debate is even more alive today ... theology is indeed affected by variant readings in the Greek texts... [nettopp derfor er det så viktig å få gjort dette riktig... jeg anbefaler at du studerer dette litt nøyere og forbereder et manus før du spiller inn en video og poster den på TH-cam, og at du får engelsken mer nøyaktig, og detaljene mer presist, dette er for viktig til å skusle bort med unøyaktige opplysninger... beklager å si dette så kontant,... men det er ment konstruktivt.... :-)) ]
This presentation should reach the Bible Academic Circles. I wonder what will be their response on this.
Good episode
Can you please share me the project link! I'm tired slandering my AKJV Bible.
Thanks brother! Great work. I do say though, the Mark of the beast passage. The Greek word for In or On is the same. If you check On and In is used interchangeable with different passages. Like Rev 9:4 Mark of God "on" their forhead. So I don't see a problem.
Thank you for defending the Textus Receptus. God bless.
can you send me your powerpoint presentation??
The last quote… C. Simonides wrote the manuscript. Thank you for your video.
Ps 12 is not about preserving words. it is about preserving people.
Do we know what Greek manuscripts Erasmus used?
Should we be worried because he was a Catholic priest?
I agree. It's sort of like saying God's word which believers all over the world used for hundreds and hundreds of years was a bit wrong, but now, we've got the right one from this discovery just from the 1800's. I don't think it makes sense.
I have not read any bible, but i am intrested in reading the bible. But i have found out that most bibles is corrupt, i live in sweden, is there any correct bibles in sweden or should i read the kjv? Or possibly just the norwegian bible guds ord?
The best bible version there is, is the one you actually DO read. Read any version in sweden. Just be AWARE of of the list in the description. The Holy Spirit will grow you up even in a corrupted version.
So which bible should I use? I want to buy my first.... is KJV the best? but the 1611 version or something?
I've been studying the Arguments for the textus receptus for years. It really is a no-brainer.
The copyright of every modern version is held by zondervan, the same company that owns the rights to the Satan's Bible.
If you open up your church has different translations, the New World Translation says that the word was a god the first chapter of John.
They say the new versions are supposed to reduce confusion, but the fruits are confusion.
These new versions are an endless problem
Your claims are misleading. Zondervan publishes many versions, they aren’t the sole copyright owner of “every modern version.” For example, the NASB is copyrighted by The Lockman Foundation.
The New World Translation was made by and for Jehovah’s Witnesses who deny the deity of Christ. They’re on par with Mormons. So that version is really completely out of the question all together.
@@therockstar17 ok, they don't hold "EVERY" modern version. 90% of them.
My guess is that most people have Zondervan Bibles in their home.
@Adam H they dont hold rights to the KJV. Everyone prints the KJV.
The point is, they are in it for the money. KJV can't be because there is no copyright.
Thomas Nelson is also owned by Harper Collins. Same company.
What about the reliability of the LXX?
Great question - what about it? And are you referring to Origen's Hexapla or the supposed BC Septuagint or the Codex Sinaiticus? I have been researching this issue as well and there's VERY little evidence of a BC Septuagint. If so, then all the "quotations" of the LXX in the NT are actually the LXX quoting the NT, not vice versa.
Case in point, go to CodexSinaiticus.org and look up Psalm 13/14. There is a HUGE chunk of text randomly added to one of the verses (I think it's highlighted in blue on the website). Where did all this text come from? Romans 3, because the scribe who wrote this Psalm accidentally quoted Paul for like 5 verses. Fun fact, the Codex Sinaiticus is the "oldest and best" version of the LXX that is available.
No reliability!!!!
Nobody guided by the Holy Spirit will be misled regarding the deity of Christ, the atonement, the resurrection, and essential doctrines by reading modern translations.
Except the “Textus Receptus” has a known PUBLICATION DATE. And entire books weren’t available in Greek when it was complied - like Revelation. Revelation was BACK TRANSLATED from Latin in 1500 by Erasmus.
15:43 not "set you free" but "make you free"
You seem to really know your stuff. I love your zeal for truth.
What do you think of brother James White and brother John Maurther? I turn to them alot for answers and explanations that are not to clean in the English Bible.
They are wolves in sheep clothing. Calvinism and trinity doctrine is a heresy. Godhead is in the bible, but not trinity.
James White is very deceptive. He has vested interest in the critical text because he works for the lockman foundation.
Thanks for Showing that Eramarus a Catholic priest put it together 🙏🛐 I like the Duay-Rheims version KJV Luther In Germany & King James left out the Aprohpa books 📚📖⛪🛐 May God bless Catholic answers does nice stuff on the topic & a Good book the Bible proves the teachings of the Catholic church by Brother Peter Diamond of Mhfm on the net📖⛪🛐 The Catholic & Ortrodox & Church Father's put the Bible together many Catholic orders hand written the Scripture's before the printing press Let's Protect the Bible Christ Said Scripture's 📖 & Oral Tradition 🙏 God bless Jesus Mary and Joseph Pray for Us Christ Save Us for the world is falling apart to Liberalism 🛐📖🙏💯 Catholic 🛐
Since the recension and text type theories have been abandoned, why do Critical Text Only scholars admit their conclusions are wrong?
Although there is some difference in the manuscripts they do not change any of the main doctrines i.e how to find the way of salvation, God has saved many people through the niv or any bibles that use the critical text.
When you fly over the Atlantic ocean, would you fly in a plane with only one of the four motors working? Or would you prefer a plane with all four motors working?
And yes, there are doctrinal differences, check the material in the links below the video.
Can not be true. Only one WORD is true.
@@Kongebarn I choose an American jet, not Chinese or Russian. I also choose to fly from the West.
@@bislig2alabama it is true look into it, God saved me through reading the niv.
God saved me also through the NIV He saves many through the modern bibles as well. He saved us in spite of us using the wrong bibles not because of them.
You said Westcott and Hort both worshipped mary. I had the same idea that both were catholic, but where do you get this from? I sincerely wanna know. In wikipedia it says both were anglican dudes
God bless
There is a book of the letters Wescott wrote to Hort and it says a great deal about him. You would be surprised at what he believed. He said the origin of species by Darwin impressed him more than the Bible. The letters were put out by his son.
Westcott and Hort's sons had their fathers' personal letters published. They were Catholic and they blast the Texts Receptus
I thought for a long time the Westcott and Hort held some wild beliefs. Unfortunately, a LOT of bad scholarly work exists on the pro-Majority/TR side of things, and almost every one of their quotes was taken (wildly) out of context. Also, it doesn't matter if WH were crazy if they did a good job translating (they didn't). Using the Genetic Fallacy is a bad line of argumentation and it is irrelevant. Tons of good reasons exist to ignore the modern Critical Text without criticizing the origin of it.
That comes from letters they wrote to each other and the letters were published by their sons after they died.
The Vatican had nothing to do with Codex Sinaiaticus. Sinaiaticus was found in the St. Catherine's monastery. It is a Greek Orthodox monastery.
I am not a fan of Sinaiaticus, but you need to get your history correct. Vaticanus dates back to the 4th century AD. It is a historically trustworthy document.
So, the thing about Origen. He seems to the first person to use "Lucifer" as the proper name for the Devil and the subject of Isa 14:12. As we know, Origen thought that the Satan will be restored one day. Other Patristic writers followed Origen's views of Lucifer, including Jerome, who penned "Lucifer" into the Latin Vulgate, and that proper name ended up in the KJV. The KJV does provide an alternate rendering: "O Lucifer: O day star"; but, how is it that one can reject Origen and the Alexandrian writers; but embrace Origen's "Lucifer"; which he may have borrowed from pagan mythology; which has one or more "Lucifer" characters?
The TR departs from the majority in many places too.
You had made a comment that dispensationalism is the correct method in which to interpret passages in the Bible yet you are arguing for the textus receptus. Please research dispensationalism and the catholic counter reformation as far as the protestant bible goes. God bless you brother.
Dear Kongebarn,
Please tell me about 1John 5:7-8. anti-Trinitarians love to boast about this verse not being in the oldest texts claiming that it was added by Erasmus. Has this passage ever been quoted by an earlier church father?
Yes
Cyprian of Carthage wrote On the Unity of the Catholic Church in 251AD and cited that verse. Odd that it just vanished, especially given what it says... ;)
@@TheFriendlyChristian
Thank you for sharing this with me. I wonder what the current pope who says Catholics worship the same nonTrinitarian god as the Muslims in his recent Vatican 2 proclamation, really thinks about this passage that all the antiTrinitarian cults hate? He has with one fell swoop quietly destroyed the one core essential doctrine that makes any group members of the greater church at large, and thus has turned the Catholic “church” into another cult. We know that he was saying Catholics worship the Muslim god and not that Muslims worship the Christian God, because if he were saying in this proclamation that Muslims actually worship the Christian God the antiTrinitarian Muslim world would come unglued up in arms screaming blasephemy and lopping off heads. Its also interesting that this same “Erasmus added it” tactic is used by heretics who hold to the heresy that Erasmus added to Matt. 19:9 and Matt. 5:32, because these heretics forbid marriage by forbidding all remarriage except the remarriage of widow/ers. My heart goes out to my Catholic brothers and sisters in Christ who are up in arms over the evil things coming from this pope who some say is St. Malachy’s last pope. May God help all His true children. God bless you.
This has been so enlightening. However it just shows me how so very close to Jesus’ death that deception took root. That trinity verse for example. I hear you out when you say that it’s supposed to read as the KJV has it & you quoted a church father who used it. But then why does Irenaeus in Against Heresies (I thinkkk the book 4 intro) that “there is none other called GOD by the
Scriptures except for the father, the son, & those who possess the adoption.”
If he believed in the trinity surely that’s not what he’d have said. Moreover, I downloaded a Byzantine Bible module & 1 Jn 5:7 is NOT as the Textus receptus & KJV have it. & the Byzantine would belong to traditional, not critical.
The story of the ms being in a garbage can ready to be burned is an old wives' tale.
bro what do you refer to with dispensationalism? is it in reference to salvation! cheers
What about the MEV translation that uses the Majority/Received text? Well?
Taking Genesis 3:1 out of context does not help one’s argument.
The TR succeeded in effectively changing the 6th commandment by altering Matt 5, verse 22. As we sit here debating commas and vocabulary Satan is sitting back and smiling at his sly handiwork.
If TR is Textus Receptus, it's the right text, not the Critical Text (that i'll call CT). Look:
In the context, the Lord says that anger is comparable to murder (since not every act of killing is necessarily murderous, for example: killing in self-defense is not a sin).
(KJV) Matthew 5:21 Ye have heard that it was said of them of old time, Thou shalt not kill; and whosoever shall kill shall be in danger of the judgment:
22 But I say unto you, That whosoever is angry with his brother without a cause shall be in danger of the judgment: and whosoever shall say to his brother, Raca, shall be in danger of the council: but whosoever shall say, Thou fool, shall be in danger of hell fire.
In the TR we see that as in the commandment, feeling anger without any cause is comparable to murder (killing without any justifiable cause).
Now on CT:
(NIV) Matthew 5:21 “You have heard that it was said to the people long ago, ‘You shall not murder,[a] and anyone who murders will be subject to judgment.’ 22 But I tell you that anyone who is angry with a brother or sister[b][c] will be subject to judgment. Again, anyone who says to a brother or sister, ‘Raca,’[d] is answerable to the court. And anyone who says, ‘You fool!’ will be in danger of the fire of hell.
In the Critical Text, the Lord says that any anger is comparable to murder, however, look at this:
(NIV) Mark 3:5 He looked around at them in anger and, deeply distressed at their stubborn hearts, said to the man, “Stretch out your hand.” He stretched it out, and his hand was completely restored.
So... Was the Lord a murder? Of course not (1 Peter 2:22)!
If I pointed this out to a sister or brother, they would say that this is not a contradiction, but rather that the anger described in Matthew 5:21-22 was not anger without reason, but that is exactly what the TR says!
See how CT confuses believers...
@@gilmarjunior7700 we run into the same problem. The proper translation in that text is “murder” not “kill”. murder and kill are not the same thing. The distinction is incredibly important in this context. There are times when it is permissible to kill. There are no times when it is permissible to murder. Once again the KJV fails the test.
@@gilmarjunior7700 I’ll also add that there is a difference between the angers described in the 2 passages(Matthew, mark). Grammatically, the anger described in Matt 5 is in a verb form, so it references more of an action of anger. The anger in Mark is a noun form, which references a feeling of anger. Those 2 “angers” are not the same.
Waldensians used the Latin Vulgate and the pre-1500s Bibles are not in full agreement with the Byzantine Textform or the TR.
W&H were definitely against the TR but there are a multitude of fairy tales circulated by the KJVonly camp.
Using the same reasoning as this blogger the KJV should have translated “Lord” as Jesus in Jude (chapter 1) verse 5 because Origen Cyril Jerome Bede read “Jesus”. See Bruce Metzger (Renewing Truth, Lord or Jesus? Metzger’s Comments on Jude 1:5)
kjv all the way
But dispensationalism is teaching more than 1 gospel and different ways of salvation in old and new testament.
Revelation 13:16 is again a transnational issue, not a textual one.
1 John 5:7. Cyprian is quoting verse 8 not the Latin insertion.
WHICH "Received Text"!!!!!!!!!!!!? ( There is more than one.)
WHICH "Critical Text"!? ( There is more than one.)