The KJV is a good translation, but there are a number of good translations. The KJV is not “THE” inspired English translation. You might prefer the KJV. No problem there. But “KJV only” is false. In the same way I could say that God’s only inspired Word is the Hebrew and Greek manuscripts. So I believe in the “Manuscript only” position 🙄 See how it works… We are blessed to have many good Bible translations, and in many languages today. Yes, there are bad “translations” too. But there are multiple good translations that are available to us in English.
no need for multiple translations. We are to read our Bibles with the Holy Spirit and not to do word studies. God did not ordain more than 150 bible versions which must be 10% different from each other due to copyright laws. You seem to ignore the possiblility of a devil who is in the world and his efforts to waterdown Gods word. Do you know that the devil exists or not?
Also note that the KJV was created over 400 years ago. There are many words in this version that are outdated, in terms of modern English today. I still believe that it is a good translation. But to say that it’s the one and only English translation for today is absolutely ludicrous.
I finally got an opportunity tonight to share the gospel with my neighbor, whom is a 33rd degree Freemason. He barely let me speak and he was very uncomfortable. But I finally got the truth out to him. Please pray for Mr. Buddy to come to know Jesus as Lord & Savior !
Freemasons have a hard time listening when it contradicts Freemasonry. Many like to say that the Mason’s are a Christian organization, which it is not. Mason’s only have to take an oath to a deity. If it Buddha, they pledge to Buddha, if they are Muslims, it is made on the Koran and to Mohammed. I will be praying he listens. I am a former Mason and I will be praying for you and he both.
@ And as it is appointed unto men once to die, but after this the judgment: Hebrews 9:27 KJB And the great white throne judgment is reserved for those who’s names were not found written in the book of life.
You need to study your chosen translation (KJV I assume, just like me) and delve into translation and meaning of words in the original language. Use Thompson and especially Stong's. There is NOT a 1 to 1 translation between English in 2024 and ancient Hebrew or Greek in 30 AD; especially with cultural contexts. Just start with the word Angel in ancient Hebrew and se how many different words were used in original text(s). The fact of the matter is that if you've gotten to the point of understanding and identifying different translations and their differences then you shouldn't close your eyes and ears to all but KJV but rather you just opened Pandoras Box to a new level of understanding and you should be using Thompson/Strongs to understand the original meaning, language and context.
All You need is in The Bible? But First you must be a Child of God or You Will Not Understand Scripture. Never listen to TV Preachers or Pastors, etc. or Read Commentaries , other Books. All you need is in The Bible . You can Read The Whole Bible in about 80hrs , just The New Testament about 20hrs? You WILL need a Strong's Concordance and Dictionary. Some Words don't mean what We think they do. I use a Thompson Chain Reference Bible.
The KJV says in Heb.9 [15] And for this cause he is the mediator of the new testament, that by means of death, for the redemption of the transgressions that were under the first testament, they which are called might receive the promise of eternal inheritance. [16] For where a testament is, there must also of necessity be the death of the testator. [17] For a testament is of force after men are dead: otherwise it is of no strength at all while the testator liveth. [18] Whereupon neither the first testament was dedicated without blood. BUT the other versions substitute covenant for testament. That is non-sense. A testament conveys one parties / persons will upon their death where a covenant is an agreement between to or more living beings / persons. Hebrews 9:15-17 New American Standard Bible 15 For this reason He is the mediator of a new covenant, so that, since a death has taken place for the redemption of the violations that were committed under the first covenant, those who have been called may receive the promise of the eternal inheritance. 16 For where there is a [a]covenant, there must of necessity [b]be the death of the one who made it. 17 For a [c]covenant is valid only when people are dead, [d]for it is never in force while the one who made it lives. - If you confuse who the Old Covenant is for and who the New Covenant is for as it is not the same as those under the gospel of grace who are able ministers of the New Testament you will be totally unaware of what the will of God is for yourself.
@@tims.449 You say that I could "confuse"..."who the New Covenant is for"....and (I) will be totally unaware of what the will of God is for yourself." Brother, Tim, I am 100% aware of what the "will of God" is for me---and for any man living (now) and also under the 'New testatment' --post Jesus--and that is: If any man repents of their sins and accepts Jesus as their messiah then they will be saved and live in eternity with the Lord. At the name of Jesus, every knee will bow.....and that is the message of the Gospel....the KJV is perfectly clear....AND...it is not necessary to have a law degree or an English degree to argue definitions and restrictions as it relates to God's plan (to redeem man from the fall). Repent. Believe in Jesus. That is the will of God.
Lifelong KJV here. I've studied other versions of the Bible, but I always end up coming back to the KJV. Not that.there aren't some good translarions other than it. I'm 62 and after a lifetime of looking imto many translations I always arrive at the conclusion that the KJV remains the best preserved version of God's Council in the English language. Just my opinion. Thanks for sharing. Have a blessed week.
Re; coming back to the KJV. me too.I do have the ESV is easier to read to a group, because the KJV punctuation is kind of a challenge. but i defer to kJV every time
My ESV says this in the foot notes: Some manuscripts add "who walk not according to the flesh, but according to the Spirit". As does my CSB. My NKJV and my KJV say some manuscripts omit the rest of the verse. These are my study Bibles: ESV Archaeology Study Bible, KJV Study Bible, ESV Study Bible, NKJV Cultural Backgrounds Study Bible, CSB Rainbow Study Bible (all the highlighting is already done, and everything is color coded by category), and ESV Journaling Study Bible (which I bought for my dad,but he'd rather use his phone, so it made it's way back onto my bookshelf) and a KJV journaling Bible. I use them all, mainly for the study notes. But my two favored ones are my ESV Archaeology Study Bible and my NKJV Cultural Backgrounds Study Bible. Those that I listed are the literal translations, which is what I stick to. I don't go for the thought for thought or the paraphrasing ones.
How can you fully understand a text if the text has been omitted? One of the most well known omissions is Acts 8:37. By removing this verse, the requirement “to believe” is done away with for salvation. Another common omission is 1 John 5:7 which states the Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost are one. How can removing a verse addressing the Trinity of God lead to an understanding of the Trinity? Furthermore, not all translations have footnotes. The KJV text does not have a copyright, but the NIV does. Every time the NIV gets revised (and there have been many revisions), a new copyright is created and more money is made. Tell me why “a better translation” has to be revised so regularly? In 1996, the “New International Version Inclusive Language Edition” was published in the UK which included gender-neutral language. Should the Bible be revised to conform to modern society’s social perspectives? Were these revisions about gender inclusion based on original manuscripts? Of course not. The Bible should change us, not us changing it. Sorry, but I fully disagree with your stand on translations.
@@Als11able Satan does not believe that he is made righteous by faith in Christ because Jesus didn't die for Satan. Satan believes in Jesus' existence. He does not believe in him for salvation. Why is it more than belief in Christ? Did not the thief on the cross simply believe and he was granted eternal life. If not for one why not for all? Is God unjust? No. Then surely we are measured in the same way as the thief?
@@lionoffireraw Matt, the KJV was derived, and translated from the Received Text, the Textus Receptus (TR), a printed Greek New Testament based upon the majority of ancient handwritten New Testament manuscripts. The manuscripts that were used to create the Textus Receptus are known as the Traditional or Byzantine Text. Romans 8:1. from the Textus Receptus: *Οὐδὲν ἄρα νῦν κατάκριμα τοῖς ἐν Χριστῷ Ἰησοῦ· μὴ κατὰ σάρκα περιπατοῦσιν, ἀλλὰ κατὰ πνεῦμα* The Morphological Greek New Testament text (which the ESV and other more contemporary Bibles use) is render as: *οὐδὲν ἄρα νῦν κατάκριμα τοῖς ἐν Χριστῷ Ἰησοῦ* Hence the difference in English translation. However, personally, and although it is only recorded in verse 8:4, I believe that the more accurate translation is the King James, because it helps express what Paul is trying to convey better. What Paul is saying, and what he means by *That the righteousness of the law might be fulfilled in us, who walk not after the flesh, but after the Spirit* is... That this *righteousness* has NOTHING to do with Deuteronomy 6:25., or walking in the *flesh* and trying to earn an insufficient righteousness. Instead, that this sufficient *Righteousness is for those who (are in Christ Jesus)* who walk after (or according to) the Spirit. Romans 10:3, 4.
I don't use the modern translations due to the fact that the majority are from Westcott and Hort, who brought forth their translation based on the Vaticanus and Alexandrian texts. Both Westcott and Hort were occultists. When I first got saved, I got a KJV Bible and struggled through it. I then got an NIV and as I read through it, the verses didn't sound right. I compared it to my KJV and the NIV sounded like man said it and the KJV was of ALMIGHTY GOD. After I found three major differences, I checked my NIV and haven't looked back since. All the problems I found were wrong translations in the old testament.
Exactly, it's a well documented fact that Westcott and Hort literally used to speak to the dead in their churches. On top of this, Sinatiacas was written by Constanine Simmonides in 1840, and Vaticanus came out of the Vatican. People don't know it, but these newer translations are not translating from the original Greek. They are using Westcott and Horts' corrupted text, which has over 27 editions.
NIV is translated thought-for-thought. KJV was translated word-for-word... But in the English from 400 years ago. That's why you see those differences. I'd encourage you to try comparing modern word-for-word translations, such as ESV, NASB, CSB, Legacy Standard Bible, to name a few.
You said it perfectly. NIv is terrible imo. aSo the KJV is a bit tricky to follow. Great. it makes us slow down and if we do that; we might even 'hear' God's voice. i know i have, many times
The King James Version (KJV) of the Bible was written by a committee of 47 scholars and clergymen under the supervision of Richard Bancroft, the archbishop of Canterbury. The KJV was published in 1611.
Those 50 PhDs have their interpretations colored by the same theology and doctrines of the 3rd century that have been used to keep Christ's promised "spirit of truth" at bay for 2000 years.
I use mostly the KJV and Geneva Bible to study, but I KNOW that the Holy spirit can teach the main message of salvation through Jesus Christ in ANY version. God is not limited to reveal TRUTH to anyone seeking Him. He knows what bible we have and how deep each person is capable of understanding. Hallelujah. 🙌
@@RuffCut Well he does actually care. Revelation 22: 18-19 ( There will be Hell to pay ) but he can teach someone who just heard the gospel only ....and never even had a bible or anything
@@Kim-js8jf you get it...you are either studying God's words or you're not...."the main message of salvation" is distorted in all modern translations.....its beside the point how we are saved
Thank you for shining a light on the issue of manuscript differences with your audience! You did a great job of emphasizing that the manuscript variance with this verse does not impact the doctrine that the Bible teaches. This is also true of the other small number of manuscript differences that we see in a handful of other verses, as well. Christians, along with academia in general, should marvel at how remarkably well-preserved the Bible is. There is no other document in the history of the world that even comes remotely close to the scale in which God's word has been preserved. Heaven and earth will pass away, but His words will not pass away.
I didn't know that! That there's no other document in the world that comes close to the preservation of the Holy Bible. Wonderful!! It's only how it should be, I know, but it's still wonderful! Makes me happy!
So He died fulfilling His Old Testament prophecy about Himself so that you would know He was God and give up your sins and keep His Commandments sinner. Revelation 1:17-18 When I saw Him, I fell at His feet as if dead. But He laid His right hand on me and said, Do not be afraid! I am the First and the Last, And the Ever-living One [I am living in the eternity of the eternities]. I died, but see, I am alive forevermore; and I possess the keys of death and Hades (the realm of the dead).
@@captainchaos52 For I determined not to know any thing among you, save Jesus Christ, and him crucified. - 1 Corinthians 2:2 He fulfilled prophecy! Isaiah 7:14 and 9:6! Mathew 1:23 and John 3:16! 🐑❤️
Walking in the spirit, is worshipping in spirit and truth, Serving God in likeness of his character and Truth. The spirit we have is God's character, his nature, so walk in love, forgiving, gentle, longsuffer etc.
If you read the verse in Greek it is really explaining that those who are in Christ Jesus walk in the Spirit and not in the flesh…..so the first part of the Verse lays out that there is no condemnation for those in Christ and the Second part is stating why, so it’s not saying what people think it’s saying because some people believe you can be in Christ and walk according to the flesh but the Verse is telling you that people in Christ doesn’t walk according to flesh but the Spiri, you may not walk perfectly
The battle is then between the dominant soul and the regenerated Spirit there lies the real challenge.Do we surrender completely , your soul ( flesh) will battle for its supremacy it has always had.
@@DaChristianYute and even reading in English, or whatever ones native language, if you look at the preceding text it does lay out what you're saying. Romans 8:1 "Therefore..." referring back to what he was saying at the end of chapter 7, my paraphrase, wretched man that I am who will save me because I do what I don't want to do and don't do what I should do, serving God in my mind ( my intent, purpose, will to do right) and serving sin in my flesh ( my weakness, my reactions, my succumbing to do wrong) Thanks be to God, through Jesus Christ, my substitute to my sin. What then, shall I purposefully sin, of course not, but when I do, I know I am covered by the undeserved grace of my Savior.
In that case I guess I'm going to hell. I see no way possible to "walk in spirit" in this world. No matter how saved we think we are we are not a spirit until we die.
@@MargaretEiblThe Greek word in John 14:2 literally means "an abode," a place to live. Look it up for yourself: "Mansion" is not a good translation. If a fancy house is what you're hoping for in heaven, it's kinda missing the point!
The Greek word is generally translated as a dwelling place. What good is a mansion in Heaven? Aren't we supposed to be worshiping God for who He is and what he has done in Christ?
Imagine the most concerned and gentle voice you can when you read the next sentence. You don't know what you're talking about. The matter is much more complex than you realize.
You made a great point that MOST modern translations go back to original manuscripts. Many think they are translated from the KJV bible. It is so important to research when you are choosing what translation to read. A "parallel" Bible of 2-4 translations side by side is very helpful!
No one has or claims to have the original manuscripts. What they claim is “oldest and best”. There are two manuscripts that they base this claim on, Sinai and Vatican (Sinaiticus and Vaticanus). Both manuscripts contain many archaeological issues that would undermine their claims of antiquity and reliability when closely examined. They have not been carbon dated and instead are dated based on the “shape of the letters” or “paleography”. Check out the book “Neither Oldest Nor Best” by Dr. David Sorenson for a great introduction to this topic. May God bless this message to you in Jesus’ name.
@@wawabbit They go back to the original Greek and Hebrew manuscripts that were used to write the original King James Bible. That way they are translating from the original language into the modern language. This is the same thing that the KJV did except the translation was into the language of their day with all the "Thee and Thou" type speech.
@@sarahkelly7825 It wasn't the language of their day. Thee and Thou and ye were used to differentiate between singular and plural. As in when Jesus said, 'Ye must be born again', this was showing EVERYONE must be born again, not just Nicodemus.
The King James writers literally had to do that very thing because they were missing resources when translating the KJV. They say so themselves in the preface to the KJV they wrote and published shortly after the KJV came out. To use the King James version of that verse to condemn adding to or taking away from the Bible is very ironic.
The one worldly thing the devil could manipulate, effectively misdirecting BILLIONS of souls straight into the abyss is the bible. I read the bible with extreme discernment, praying for wisdom and conviction daily.
Hell was created for the devil and his angels. How do we know? The Bible tells us. Without blood, there is no forgiveness of sins. May the Lord bless you. ✝️
@@Corey-MilkyWayWhisper Satan Was Given Dominion Over The Earth Until The 2nd Coming. Reference to satan's dominion over earth can be found throughout the bible. Though Jesus Christ when being crucified stated John 14-30:31 I will not say much more to you, for the prince of this world is coming. He has no hold over me, but he comes so that the world may learn that I love the Father and do exactly what my Father has commanded me.
@@viralswim Matthew 28:18 - Jesus says that all authority in heaven and in EARTH is given to Him. Satan does not have authority until the Second coming, he lost it when Christ resurrected.
❌ *I do NOT run ads on this channel (my conviction), so I make no money from ad revenue.* ➡ If you’d like to support this work, please consider donating🙂🙏 (see links below) ✅ Patreon link: www.patreon.com/lionoffireministries ✅ Paypal link: www.paypal.me/lionoffireministries Also subscribe on RUMBLE: rumble.com/c/LIONofFIRE
I don't run ads on my Bible chatter podcast either too secular also someone that watches my Bible podcast told me that Christianity comes from Satan and man that Yahweh don't like Christianity
Hey Matt!, I like alot of things you've said in some of your videos, but, brother, I have to tell you that, You must Repent of what you've said in this video, cus, you just taught that we can use all translations of the Bible in English, and that there all inspired, and that the KJV isn't the Word, or that it isn't "enough" of God's word!?, brother, that's blasphemous!, listen, you've got to understand that, God said he doesn't want us all to be teachers, lest we sin in teaching something that is wrong and cause others to sin, or lest, being a novice, and filled with pride, we condemn ourselves in our human carnal understanding of doctrine and get in trouble with the LORD because we are unable to repent of the false doctrine we have believed ourselves, or have taught others to believe and were afraid now to tell them the truth because we might get hate and rejection for telling them the truth.And now this is the sad part, you have just taught tons of brothers and sisters in Christ, to believe most of the false doctrine that the world spews, and you just unknowingly propagated it, why? Because you've been decieved into thinking that this doctrine you've learned is right, and now you have taught that God's Word in English( the KJV) is not the right and only translation in the English tongue,but that we need another translation, or more so, all these other translations which will supposedly further the deeper meaning of the Scriptures, this you have taught in this video, and you said that words were missing in The KJV, you are unknowingly doing what the devil wants you to do, that is, teach that all translations are inspired, and that they are all profitable, that's a lie from the Devil, Jesus said that He would preserve His word forever in Psa 12:7, God inspired David to write this that he said in Psalms, 6The words of the LORD are pure words: as silver tried in a furnace of earth, purified seven times.[Which is the seven Bibles from Tyndales to the KJB , that England has made into English, that was getting more and more accurate, until the perfected word for word in meaning, KJV, came to be,] 7Thou shalt keep them, O LORD, thou shalt preserve them from this generation for ever. Which mean from Moses to David to now in old English, God has preserved His word forever, or else He wouldn't have said through His prophet Isaiah that we are to "seek ye out of the book of the LORD" in Isa 34:16, which means not every Bible is the word of God,but one is,the Kjv, and God warned about His word being changed in modern versions in Rev 22: 17-18, Anyway brother repent of your teaching in this video and tell people the TRUTH of the Words that God has made me tell you. Love you brother, and I pray you do better in Jesus Christ's Almighty name! Amen.
@@kevinbrown9378 The KJV is a good translation, but there are a number of good translations. The KJV is not “THE” inspired English translation. You might prefer the KJV. No problem there. But “KJV only” is false. In the same way I could say that God’s only inspired Word is the Hebrew and Greek manuscripts. So I believe in the “Manuscript only” position 🙄 See how it works… We are blessed to have many good Bible translations, and in many languages today. Yes, there are bad “translations” too. But there are multiple good translations that are available to us in English.
@lionoffireraw that's a lie, don't decieve yourself so easily, God is powerful enought to preserve His word, for Heaven and Earth shall pass away, but my word shall not pass away, Go and read the translators of the KJV in the Didicatory and see what they say about the KJV being translated from the Orginal sources of the Hebrew and Greek, and go and watch the video that I supplied in the comments, and have a view of his channel.
First of all that was at the end of Revelation talking about the book of Revelation. But, there are warnings for leading people astray ( wolves in sheeps clothing) .
Ironically, that verse was translated in the KJV by Desiderius Erasmus, who literally had to "remove and add" from the text because he had to do patchwork in order to complete Revelation in King James' strict deadline. The vatican wouldn't let him borrow the Greek manuscripts he needed to complete the work, so he had to interchange Latin with Greek and then somehow, had to figure out how to get it into the Old English of the KJV. Just read the preface the KJV translators wrote, it has all that important information. By the way, that's not to say that the translation of Revelation in the KJV is bad, because it's not. God can still use it to put forth His Word!
No more choir, no more organ/piano. loud guitars a booming drums instead. No songs from the hymnals, just worldy rock beat repetitive meaningless crap. looking for a real church, in a town fv 120,000 Thing is, so few see a problem with this and their explanations to justify it are at best; annoying. The wrong people are calling the shots. Thanks Rick Warren, but NO thanks
The KJV is the most accurate and word for word bible. Written by god chosen the true Israelites. All these other religious books that have been altered to hide the truth are a thought for thought book for man made lies.
I love you as a brother in Christ and pray for you every day. I also really appreciate your channel and have learned a lot from you. Since I grew up with the KJV I'm staying with it! I still read and study from my Scofield KJV that I've had for many years and is very precious to me. Thanks Matt.
The same applies to 1 John 5:7 1 John 5:7 - _For there are three that bear record in heaven, the Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost: and these three are one._ (KJV) 1 John 5:7 - _For there are three that testify:_ (ESV)
The cases are not the same. The I John 5:7 text has no ancient Greek manuscript that includes these words. The majority of the ancient witnesses support 'who walk not according to the flesh' and a good majority of those include 'but according the Spirit'.
@@blackukulele you’re absolutely correct! The reason that those words are included is to justify the Trinity, which was a later in the second or third century doctrine and I’m trying to remember the so-called church father from of all places Egypt that came up with it. The unity in that Trinity the way it’s presented is that it’s a closed group. It doesn’t allow for the plan of salvation to include the children of God as actually having the God DNA for lack of a better term plus the human DNA from their parents. Of course, the word that became flesh Jesus Christ if you want to use that analogy has both the human DNA and the God DNA. The Trinity duction would have you believe that we won’t really be children of God will be more like some house pet like a dog or a cat, but not God, but we are supposed to become children of God and you can’t square that with a Trinity doctrine God in three persons. I don’t really know what else was left out but this one definitely belongs dumped because it wasn’t in the Stevens text of 1556, which was a translation of the step two I’m pretty sure
The reason not all ancient manuscripts do not include it, is because the KJV, NKJV, Tyndale Bible, Geneva Bible, and Bishop’s Bible are the only ones translated from the Textus Receptus out of Antioch, while all others are translated from the Sinaiticus and Vaticanus, in which the Roman Catholics use to translate their altered translations.
@@lionoffireraw So God let us limp along with an inferior manuscript all these centuries? Doesn't sound like a very competent God to me. Maybe he was just getting old and forgetful, and we had to wait until he remembered that he hid the best manuscript in his sock drawer.
The TR is a critical text derived FROM the KJV, NOT the other way around. Before the TR was made up, it never existed in ANY manuscript. It's a purely man made manuscript.
@@VOLKHVORONOVICH Always one. Read and apply, with a pure heart, and you will be confounded, not confused; as it, through the Holy Spirit, reveals itself to you, regardless of version. Ultimately Taking you to a version you 'may need'. May you be incredibly Blessed in so doing. And anyone reading this comment. The Bible 'is not' what you may think it is. It is most certainly the Word of the living God. But mock at one's own peril.
This is not the only verse they have removed from the Bible! I’m staying with the KJV…as it’s… in my estimation… the most trustworthy! Thank you for bringing this to our attention!😊
I feel blessed to have accidentally come upon this video (in my feed) where im meeting people who read and who revere God's Word! "To this man will I look, even to him that is poor and of a contrite spirit, who TREMBLES AT MY WORD!." Isa 66:2
Thank you, brother. I never noticed that the second part was missing from the various translations I've used over the years. However, I've been reading from the NKJV for the past 2 years, and after watching your video I took a look at the verse only to find that not only is the second part of verse 1 contained there but I further noticed that last year I had highlighted it in my Bible because I'd actually never read it in that form before. This complete verse indeed sends a more urgent message to walk by faith and live as one who has faith. It seems that the Romans has more in common with James than many like to admit and this is the evidence.
We still have to be careful of any modern translations of the Bible, because I believe some of them may have changed the doctrine by omitting it, and then expect the reader to read the footnote, when it was never needed to be put in a footnote in the first place. There is nothing wrong with the KJV, and a point of interest, the KJV comes from the manuscripts from Antioch of Syria, while most (if not all the other modern day translations) come from the manuscripts out of Alexandria, Egypt, which are riddled with issues and do not agree with one another. The manuscripts from Egypt are the ones Roman Catholicism uses.
If you had written "many modern translations" instead of "any modern translations", your comment would have been correct. Actually, the ALT is, without doubt, the most accurate Bible in the English language.
The Textus Receptus used by the KJV translators. Manuscripts compiled by a Catholic monk and dedicated to the Pope. Then the KJV only cult say that modern translations based on older more accurate manuscripts are "Vatican versions". The wilful ignorance of the KJV only cult is painful.
You have just proved that teaching of doctrine should come directly from the Holy Spirit, not from man's efforts. The Holy Spirit leads us into all truth...the Bible of Constantine and Luther most likely was not put together ' in the Spirit '. Teach firstly how to be constantly filled with the Spirit of Jesus, and how to have confidence in His Presence and comfort, and Godly education. Perhaps He leads you into all truth through the Bible or in other ways and means. Assuming that the Bible is the Rhema word from cover to cover does not match up with God removing our stony hearts, replacing them with soft fleshy hearts and putting his statutes and commandments into our hearts...this matches up more with being filled with the Spirit.
Woe to any man which removes any or adds to the LIVING WORD OF JEHOVAH GOD. This is also in the BIBLE. The LION IS COMING, Pray and prepare yourselves America and world. ACTS 2: 38, II CHRONICLES 7: 14, DEUT 29: 27-29 Tick Tock America and world...time as you've known it, is short.
Just got off work and saw this. I grew up KJV only but for many years now i like the NAS bible. I stiil use KJV as well but my sister gave me her ESV bible 2 weeks before she died almost 2 years ago now. I treasure it and am getting more acquainted with this version. Thank you for all of this information and how you break it down its so good! always learning everyday ❤😂
I have an extremely old version of the King James Bible written from the 1611 translation. In it he is called Prince James, King of Great Britain, France and Ireland Defender of the Faith and it is called Holy Bible rather then King James Bible. It includes "The Epistle Dedicatory" written under his name, something not in the new King James Bibles. It also contains many differences to the new KJV, many words that differ and as a result I find the meanings sometimes differ as a result. To change a word alters the context and can sometime create confusion and questions. My wife who was raised on the new version even has issues with the wording of my old bible, telling me I am wrong or that it is wrong because hers is worded differently and she doesn't like the wording of mine. Even though hers was written far after, she feels mine is the one that's wrong. Her explanation is that the newer version was worded in such a way to make it easier for people to understand but to me I find it misdirects people by it's altered meanings and exemption of some text. Words can be powerful tools and when they are altered just in the slightest, they can have altered meaning altogether. Some of the passages when read from the older bible then compared to the newer one seem to come across totally different, having an almost total different meaning.
I don't like watered-down versions which is why I stick to the Old King James and I have read a Jewish New Testament wrote by play Jewish man who is a scholar and it sounds like the NIV
Thank you Matt, for that careful explanation of how important it is to read different versions in English so that we have a richer understanding of the meanings of the verses. May God continue to bless your ministry and keep you strong.
It is said that we never forget every single thing we have learned, heard, seen or done in our lives. That every millisecond is recorded. We may not be able to retrieve or remember most of it, but our soul knows and the Akashic Records has it all recorded. So when we try to tell someone about God, the Bible or Jesus, or even other religious teachings, even though the person may not be interested, he/she will never, ever forget. And know that later, sometimes years later, that person may remember something you said, maybe just one thing you didn't think much of at the time, and it will change their lives. So never feel your time and effort is wasted in trying to help someone, whether it's about God or about life in general. You never can know what will be important to them.
I was instructed in 2004 by the Holy Spirit to stick with the KJV. I was told, "Do not lean to the left, nor the right." I didn't know why at the time, but I did what the spirit told me. I understood two years later when I read a different version. Here's what I found. When you remove or add certain words, it give the reader the idea that this is the only meaning to what the scripture is stating. In example, when the KJV Bible state thou shall not kill, there's many ways in which we may kill someone without knowing. The other versions leave the readers attaching man's limited definition of what to kill does and could mean. Long story made short, the KJV was TRANSLATED from the original God inspired text, and the newer versions are man's INTERPRETATION to what was translated(theses words are similar BUT not the same). The Bible is clear about if you add or subtract ANYTHING from it. Hence, why the Christian community is so divided. There's more to add to this but this is one tidbit. Amen.
@bibletruthbeingtold5673 Exactly spot on sister, also, when the words are changed, removed, or added to, it makes it nearly impossible for the scripture to interpret itself with other scripture properly to receive the full revelation of the word, especially concerning the parables. God is perfect, and every word that is written in scripture is by no mistake. The word of God says don't add or take away from the word for a reason. there are no errors with God. And, also, what I notice is that many times I hear people say that they don't like to read the KJV because it's hard to understand, not realizing that it is not by accident for which it is written that way. The word of God is Spirit and the things of God can only be known by the Spirit of God which take time to digest and requires patience on our part to wait on God's Holy Spirit who will teach us all things and not man.
1 Corinthians 2:9-11 (KJV) But as it is written, Eye hath not seen, nor ear heard, neither have entered into the heart of man, the things which God hath prepared for them that love him. But God hath revealed them unto us by his Spirit: for the Spirit searcheth all things, yea, the deep things of God. For what man knoweth the things of a man, save the spirit of man which is in him? even so the things of God knoweth no man, but the Spirit of God. 1 Corinthians 2:12-14 (KJV) Now we have received, not the spirit of the world, but the spirit which is of God; that we might know the things that are freely given to us of God. Which things also we speak, not in the words which man's wisdom teacheth, but which the Holy Ghost teacheth; comparing spiritual things with spiritual. But the natural man receiveth not the things of the Spirit of God: for they are foolishness unto him: neither can he know them, because they are spiritually discerned.
Fantastic humble description. Some KJV only people are not so humble and say not so nice things about translations which i think hurts the hearts of the translators and researchers.
Let the bun fight begin! Matt, you knew what would happen in here, lol. I read from six different translations because over time I wanted to find out what they are all like. Every bible is a gift from God. That’s it. I grew up KJV and still enjoy it sometimes. Now I have NRSV, NKJV, ESV, LSB, NASB ‘95 AND KJV. Each and every bible I pick up teaches me something new because a change in translation or a different type face can help us see what we may have glossed over by reading forever from one version. I love the word of God and can’t get enough of it! 📚📙📘📗📕📔📖🙏✝️💟🇦🇺
💯🎯 As you pointed out other Bible translations are done by translating from the ancient manuscripts not from the KJV… maybe people who cling to theories that certain translations are inaccurate need to learn koine Greek, Aramaic and Hebrew and look at it for themselves. Just a thought.
When we forgive there is no condemnation. Period. " If you had known what these words mean, 'I desire mercy, not sacrifice,' you would not have condemned the innocent."
I was told NIV was published by the same publisher who published 'the joy of gay sex'.and has many Holy Scriptures removed.I am sorry that I don't remember which ones,but at the time I checked and it is true.without The Holy Spirit,we have no relationship.without a relationship with God,we are just lip service.I believe.Good video.God Bless you Matt.✝️🛐
I strongly believe in the Holy spirit who is here and our helper and comforter who will guide and teach us all about what God Almighty requires of us I'm this end times as we continue waiting for the soon return of Jesus Christ Almighty our Lord and Saviour and King 🙏
Hello! Thank you for your comment! I'm glad you chose to talk about the NKJV. I'm French, and I have an NKJV Bible. However, my first language is French. And in French, there are also several translations.
NKJV is my Bible too (I'm Orthodox so for the OT we use the Septuagint with the Deuterocanon books included, and for NT we use the KJV/NKJV). Wonderful translations.
Some thing just doesnt sit right with me with modern transaltions. Why are some transaltions gender neutral. Thousands of words are changed every time they bring out a new translation, they contradict from each other, how can that be the word of God.. i started with nlt to esv and now have a kj journal bible..
Good morning Matt and thank you for sharing this point. For myself personally, if I am looking at a modern interpretation of the bible, I ALWAYS CROSS-REFERENCE to the KJV. I look at the modern versions as tools when I'm explaining or for myself to understand God's word. It becomes a slippery slope when man is removing and/or changing the position of text in scripture. It makes me nervous because if someone is attempting to grasp the understanding and do not have the proper reference or teaching of scripture, this can cause much confusion, and we know God is not the author of confusion. I'll leave with this scripture; Deut. 4:2 - "Ye shall not add unto the word which I command you, neither shall ye diminish ought from it, that ye may keep the commandments of the Lord your God which I command you.", and again in Rev. 22:18-20. I thoroughly enjoy your channel. Keep doing what God has blessed you to do and may his grace and blessings abound in you.
I love the King James Version. To me it just reads more "majestic" . It, to me, has more of the "feel" of God's word. In either case, invite the Holy Spirit into your study time. He will indeed guide you. I once heard the question asked "What is the best version of the Bible to read?" It was answered "The one that is open!"
Jesus, the Gospel writers, Paul, and the other Epistle writers did NOT speak English. The New Testament was written mostly in Greek, not English. Certainly not King James English. The English Standard Version, and several other modern versions, are not changing God's Word simply because they differ from the King James Version; they are relying on the oldest possible Greek manuscripts that make up all the books of the New Testament. We have NO original manuscripts, no original Bible. Those who are convinced that the KIng James Version is the original are very mistaken, and they are not doing God's will when they insist that all Christians MUST stick to the KJV, becoming a burdensome stumbling block to believers who DO rely on the Greek, which is what we are supposed to be doing if we are seeking accuracy. This is not a new phenomenon. Christians have been aware of this for many centuries. Ask yourself this: What were Christian believers relying upon prior to the publication of the KIng James Version in 1611?
@@dannoland Exactly! So many people in America are under the impression that King James is the original, the only true Bible. Which is absurd. That language is outdated. We say, "let the children come to me" now, not "suffer the children to come unto me." Suffer no longer means what it did in King James' day. So why are we speaking like that and reading that? It's very bizarre.
The translations of the Bible that we have today are easily traceable to one of the two lines of manuscripts. From the Antioch manuscripts, (manuscripts from where they were first called Christians) we have the following English translations (not an all-inclusive list): Wycliffe Bible (1388), Martin Luther Bible (1522), Tyndale Bible (1522), Coverdale Bible (1535), Matthews Bible (1537), Great Bible (1539), Geneva Bible (1560), Bishops Bible (1568), King James Bible (1611), and New King James Bible (1982) From the Alexandrian manuscripts (corrupted manuscripts, Egypt), we have the following English translations (not an all-inclusive list): Rheims-Douay (1582), Revised Version (1881), American Standard Version (1901), RSV, NASV, LB, NSRB, JB, TEV, NEB, NIV, GNB, NRSV, NAB, NCV, NBV, HCSB, NLT, ISV, ESV. There is a difference. This is why “bibles” read differently. They don’t all come from the same manuscripts. The very first attack that Satan made was to change Gods Word in Genesis 3:1-5.
Yes exactly. God values His word and values us understanding it. If that is true and I believe it is then how could He have us using perverted manuscripts for hundreds of years? He didn't KJV is the superior.
@ Indeed. I was a NASV dude years ago and some KJB guy told me it was perverted. Well, I sat out to prove him wrong! The more I did the research (not people’s opinions), the more I couldn’t deny that the King James guy was right! God created the languages and He is capable of translating them Perfectly. Aside from holding every atom in the universe together. And I have no doubt (from my own research) that the King James Bible is God’s Perfect Word for English speaking people. People can argue with me about it, but I unbiasedly saw the proof myself. If He is able to translate His language into human, Hebrew and Greek, it’s nothing for Him to translate it into English. Perfectly. Why would God want us to know Him and not provide us with His Perfect Word to read? John 1:1 “In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.”
The words know and understand sounds the same don't they? I remember years ago I had the KJV and in the story of lot, it reads bring the Angels out so we can know them. Meaning sex. But in another Bible version, my friend had said to bring them out so we can understand them. Just that one word changed the whole meaning. So we do need to be careful. Take care
Mm, indeed it makes sense. Though it should be pointed out that there, technically, it was only that particular book that Jesus was warning about changing. Not talking about the rest of the books and letters included in our Bible. There might be another verse that covers those too. . .
Thank you brother - God bless you too! I've been reading several versions of the Bible, from different eras and languages. The text might be sometimes completely different, but the message in my opinion still has always stayed the same. I have no fear, since God protects his Word!
It is interesting to note that KJV vs modern translations use different manuscripts. It is also interesting to note that the KJV translators sometimes used a manuscript which was edited by a guy who used no textual references i.e. some verses aren't even found in a manuscript, he added or interpreted them in his own way. So always good for anyone to make sure they understand where their translation comes from, use multiple different ones based on multiple different manuscripts and understand that modern translations are in a sense more accurate (some like the ESV, LSB, NASB etc), while some are less accurate in their translation but try to convey more thought (like NIV, NLT etc... ). I personally use the NKJV and LSB. My wife uses the ESV and KJV... The important thing is to actually study the Bible, not just read it... Think, understand and learn.
So you just take their word when they say “oldest and best”? And that they went to THE greek? No, they translate from the westcott and hort greek text, which was invented in the 18:00’s and the “oldest and best” are really only two, error filled alexandrian texts one is called vaticanus(gues where that was found) and the other is siniaticus which magically appeared, looking brand new in the 18:40’s. How about you do a video for the 15 other deleted verses? Start with the one about prayer and fasting??? Mathew 17:21??? How do you teach the doctrine of fasting without that verse?
The KJV is a good translation, but there are a number of good translations. The KJV is not “THE” inspired English translation. You might prefer the KJV. No problem there. But “KJV only” is false. In the same way I could say that God’s only inspired Word is the Hebrew and Greek manuscripts. So I believe in the “Manuscript only” position 🙄 See how it works… We are blessed to have many good Bible translations, and in many languages today. Yes, there are bad “translations” too. But there are multiple good translations that are available to us in English.
Er, that specific verses is the only new testament verse teaching the proper use and power of prayer and fasting, the 12 were not fasting and praying correctly and therefore lacked the power to cast out demons. This is not a minor verse on fasting but the most important, Now address my other points?
You talk about “good translations” but the point you seem to be ignorant of, is that there are TWO greek texts, very different, one the received text, which was the text of the reformation and the one that took the bible around the world, all church fathers up to 1800’s, then there came two heretics and made up a fake greek text which is what all the modern perversions use .All the false churches that guys like you attack, they use modern versions like living, message, NIV etc.
@happydays310 Curious possible timings, for Christ's Second Advent. 1947+80=2027+7=~2033+ (Fall_Feast of Atonement 2033). 2000+30=2030+3.5=~2033+ (Fall_Feast of Atonement 2033).
We are saved by grace alone, through faith alone. When a person exercises true saving faith, they are born again. When a person is born again, this produces a transformation. The works that come from this transformation are NOT meritorious of salvation in ANY way, but rather are the evidence of the born-again experience. This is the gospel of grace alone. A cat meows because it is a cat. The meowing doesn’t make it a cat.
This is why I am always so confused at the people who say the KJV is the ONLY translation that you should use. I am not saying it's a bad translation at all, but based on the oldest manuscripts we have, there are other translations that seem to be much closer to a word for word translation, like the NASB or ESV.
Thing is: 150 years ago, it was the only translation in America. And everyone was happy. So along comes the new stuff and not there is contention. So does that say anything?
@@glenw-xm5zf People were happy with the Geneva Bible and then were very upset when the King James Version came out, claiming "it was a corruption of Scripture". So yes, it does say something: That contention can rise among people even when GOOD new stuff comes along.
Yes, good points there! The 2-nd part of the full version of Romans 8:1 logically explains what its statement of the 1-st part implies, (and without this 2-nd part, the 1-st part remains rather obscure and abstract (but that would appeal to fleshly mind that doesn't look for implications of God's words because "it is enmity against God", His Spirit, Laws (as Romans 8:7 explains later). Fleshly mind "prefers" abstract obscure formulas of God's word "to believe in" as in abstract dogmas (without explanations of practical implications of God's word). Therefore many who choose to simply "believe" in mere symblical words/statements of the Bible without finding out their implications will have "symbolic salvation" from Jesus (as He pointed out in Matthew 7:22-23; Luke 6:46)
Was the Bible was originally written in English? Did Jesus speak English? I challenge you to research it for yourself. KJV is a good translation; but there are other good translations too, which speak the language we speak (20th/21st century English). Of course there are poor translations also, so we need to be discerning.
To anyone who thinks the modern translations have not been corrupted, I urge you to please research the words "Simmonides affair" and/or "Constantine Simmonides"
@ulusalani it has nothing to do with the KJV or the Geneva Bible. But it has everything to do with the modern translations, which come from the critical text, which consists of vatincanus and Siniaticus in which Simmonides himself confessed to writing Siniaticus in 1840. So yeah, you're right, it has nothing to do with the real bible but has everything to do with the corrupted new translations of the Bible.
I still am at heart a KJV only Baptist. However, I realized it's just not worth it to argue day and night with my own brothers and sisters. We're on a mission together. There are widows and orphans to feed, and the gospel go be preached. Gonna probably pick up an NIV just so I don't have to translate for others at my Young Adults group. Lol. I hope I can continue to grow this way, God willing.
KJV is one of the best translations, for sure 👍🏼 There are a number of errors in the KJV, as there are with other translations. The Textus Receptus was good for its time. The only perfect Bible is the original, in the original language.
What does a lamp represent in the KJB? How about oil? Light? Now read the parable of the 10 virgins. Half have lamps that give light, half don't. Now if a lamp represents the Word of God and Jesus is the Word of God, then what is the lamp of the wicked? Why is it the virgins thank they know Christ, but don't? Do these people know the Word of God, or someone else?
Good job. Wearing out my Geneva 1560 Bible, published under the authority of Queen Elizabeth I, who also paid for it. It is perfectly translated from the original Greek (Pre-17th Century), Aramaic (NT) and Hebrew (OT). Get a copy and always use it in parallel to all other translations. Note: Start with 2 Thessalonians 2:3 in your version, and then compare it to the Geneva 1560.
FYI, the Septuagint is the Greek version of the Old Testament. Naturally the Septuagint would not include any of the New Testament, which Romans 8:1 is.
I grew up with the KJV, and in my early 20's was part of a ministry that taught from this version in depth. One thing they pointed out was that ALL " italicized "print means it was added by the translators .Sometimes, it helps other times it can be ignored. BTW, my NASB version omits the latter part of Rom. 8: 1 as well. I believe the NIV, too. Nice presentation, Pastor ! Thanks!!😊
15 years ago in bible college, I did an in-depth study of Romans 8:1. One or two of the teachers were not allowing students to use anything but KJV. I went through all of the translations available on the You Bible app. 47 at the time. Only the KJV, NKJV and Amplified has the ending portion. We decided they were the ones who were incorrect. With 44 translations, some from further back than the KJV, only 3 were using condemning language right after it declared there was ‘no condemnation’. I haven’t used the KJV for years. Not because of that mistake, but as an eschatologist, I’d found many places where KJV wasn’t up to correct interpretation. There are enough translations out there that anyone can get the Truth of God.
A lot of people make a big deal over the very few times the early Greek manuscripts of the NT disagree. What is amazing to me is we have thousands of early manuscripts and the vast majority of the time they are in agreement.
It’s once saved always saved. There’s another verse that does pretty much the same thing. Romans 8:9 in the authorized version says ‘but ye are not in that flesh but in that spirit IF so be that the Spirit of God dwell in you… another version reads ‘you are not in the flesh BECAUSE the Spirit of God dwells in you…’ notice the difference? One leaves the responsibility up to us to have the Spirit of God in us, by faith and obedience. The other leaves it out of our grasp that regardless of how we live, we have the Spirit of God.
@Dovebird7hopeJohn14 I think this is about as clear as it gets on the subject: "They, whom God has accepted in His Beloved, effectually called, and sanctified by His Spirit, can neither totally nor finally fall away from the state of grace, but shall certainly persevere therein to the end, and be eternally saved. II. This perseverance of the saints depends not upon their own free will, but upon the immutability of the decree of election, flowing from the free and unchangeable love of God the Father; upon the efficacy of the merit and intercession of Jesus Christ, the abiding of the Spirit, and of the seed of God within them, and the nature of the covenant of grace: from all which arises also the certainty and infallibility thereof. III. Nevertheless, they may, through the temptations of Satan and of the world, the prevalency of corruption remaining in them, and the neglect of the means of their preservation, fall into grievous sins; and, for a time, continue therein: whereby they incur God’s displeasure, and grieve His Holy Spirit, come to be deprived of some measure of their graces and comforts, have their hearts hardened, and their consciences wounded; hurt and scandalize others, and bring temporal judgments upon themselves." Westminster Confession of Faith, chapter 22.
@Dovebird7hopeJohn14 It's a late hour where I live, but I can't see anything in what you wrote in that comment that I disagree with. However, the teaching of Scripture is that the effect of being born again is that a believer leads a changed life. Take the Apostle Paul as an example: Before his conversion he was persecuting Christians and wanted as many of them killed as possible; after he was saved, that stopped and he instead preached the faith which he had once been determined to destroy. He wasn't sinless, however, and Romans 7 is very clear about the conflict between the old man and the new man within the believer.
Textual variants are so fascinating, aren't they? They actually lend credibility to the Bible too. That's because we have what is called "open transmission", which means we really examine all manuscript copies to find what is the most reliable. Something like the Quran has "closed transmission", which means they have a single set of manuscripts, and if anything else from that era is found, it is burned. The majority of textual variants that we know about in the Bible are little things caused by the copyist such as accidentally skipping or misspelling a word. And sometimes, scribal notes that were added in the margins somewhere along the way also get added into the text. The story of the woman caught in adultery where Jesus says "Let he who is without sin cast the first stone" is another example. It is most likely a true story, but not actually Scripture.
YES exactly. KJV also has 1John 5;7-8.(the trinity explained in 1 clear verse) and as you say, you can work this out anyway. Those who are truly in Christ Jesus do not fight or argue for their right to be like the world or sin. I agree with this video. Faith is belief plus repentance (shows in action)
I know… 😅😅😅 I just jokingly tell them that I could never use anything other than the Hebrew and Greek manuscripts 😂 (making this comment highlights how ridiculous KJV only is)
@@lionoffirerawLol 😅 The purpose of all good translation is to translate the original Hebrew and Greek back into the KJV! Yet that's what many KJV Only proponents might as well say and some even truly believe the KJV was divinely inspired just like the original biblical Hebrew and Greek! It's pretty wild, I can't wrap my head around it, but that's how many of them actually think. Mark Ward has a lot of good material on the KJV Only movement on his channel, not to mention his book Authorized: The Use and Misuse of the King James Bible, and just tons of other interesting things on the Bible, textual criticism, etc. 😊
Yes, my older NIV includes the rest of the verse in the footnotes, stating that it is found in later manuscripts. So in fact, that bit is added later than the earliest manuscripts. Remember though to distinguish between Translations and paraphrase editions written by a single author.
I feel strongly that whether considered earlier manuscripts or found in more later manuscripts, we cannot take too much liberty to remove words from the text, which is the case in many modern translations. They don't even indicate in footnotes or in parentheses that the additional or different words were found in some or other deemed later manuscripts, or in the Majority text. (I find that only the NKJV took the trouble to highlight these significant differences in footnotes throughout its version of the New Testament). They already made judgment that these words were later added into text, but reversely, the judgment can be made that they were omitted from those few earlier manuscripts. The Alexandrian codices were themselves dated (if we can totally trust dating) about three centuries from the original manuscripts, and codex Vaticanus and Sinaiticus differ in many places. I also find it strange that the scribe would add a whole meaningful clause or sentences or whole stretch of sentences (more effort needed to copy) into the text. As many may be the spoken words of God (/Jesus), and His prophets and servants, we must NOT make liberal judgment to remove them from their translations. Human textual criticism should not be elevated above possible inspiration of Scriptures, considering we don't have the originals.
Critical verse, explaining who sinners and saints are; we know those that don't recover themselves from willful sin will not enter heaven, but us that do will hear; " well done good and faithful servent, enter into my glory". Condemnation for those not walking in the Holy Spirit, Jesus in us, condemned already!
The NIV is an OK translation. It tries to be as word-for-word as possible whilst still reading like normal English. The footnotes highlight the literal meanings of orginal language words if they have substituted in a more understand modern expression in the text. The footnotes identify key differences in the manuscripts and alternative translation options where there is uncertainty or other viable options. Get the NIV Study Bible and it gives you more useful information and explanations. If you want something that follows the word order and phrases of the original languages more closely go for the NASB or LSB or the NLT if you want something that translates the meanings of the original sentences into regular modern English without rigid adherence to the original language word order or historic/cultural words we don't use. And if you want a version that uses the same manuscript compelation basis as the KJV but translates in more modern English there is the NKJV and MEV. But don't worry. The NIV is a reliable translation and the Study Bible version is really helpful if you can get one.
The KJV is a good translation, but there are a number of good translations. The KJV is not “THE” inspired English translation. You might prefer the KJV. No problem there. But “KJV only” is false. In the same way I could say that God’s only inspired Word is the Hebrew and Greek manuscripts. So I believe in the “Manuscript only” position 🙄 See how it works… We are blessed to have many good Bible translations, and in many languages today. Yes, there are bad “translations” too. But there are multiple good translations that are available to us in English. Also note that the KJV was created over 400 years ago. There are many words in this version that are outdated, in terms of modern English today. I still believe that it is a good translation. But to say that it’s the one and only English translation for today is absolutely ludicrous.
The KJV is a good translation, but there are a number of good translations.
The KJV is not “THE” inspired English translation.
You might prefer the KJV. No problem there. But “KJV only” is false.
In the same way I could say that God’s only inspired Word is the Hebrew and Greek manuscripts.
So I believe in the “Manuscript only” position 🙄 See how it works…
We are blessed to have many good Bible translations, and in many languages today.
Yes, there are bad “translations” too.
But there are multiple good translations that are available to us in English.
all new versions are vatican versions. Have you checked the majority of manuscripts or just parroting what they tell you?
no need for multiple translations. We are to read our Bibles with the Holy Spirit and not to do word studies. God did not ordain more than 150 bible versions which must be 10% different from each other due to copyright laws. You seem to ignore the possiblility of a devil who is in the world and his efforts to waterdown Gods word. Do you know that the devil exists or not?
@@spod11 if there’s no need for multiple translations, then I will stick to the Hebrew and Greek manuscripts.
Also note that the KJV was created over 400 years ago.
There are many words in this version that are outdated, in terms of modern English today.
I still believe that it is a good translation. But to say that it’s the one and only English translation for today is absolutely ludicrous.
@@lionoffireraw You cannot see the trees for the forest. But you are young yet...
I finally got an opportunity tonight to share the gospel with my neighbor, whom is a 33rd degree Freemason. He barely let me speak and he was very uncomfortable. But I finally got the truth out to him. Please pray for Mr. Buddy to come to know Jesus as Lord & Savior !
God bless you 🙏❤️
Just said a prayer
Freemasons have a hard time listening when it contradicts Freemasonry. Many like to say that the Mason’s are a Christian organization, which it is not. Mason’s only have to take an oath to a deity. If it Buddha, they pledge to Buddha, if they are Muslims, it is made on the Koran and to Mohammed. I will be praying he listens. I am a former Mason and I will be praying for you and he both.
your bible says to not force the word of God on people,. is this a catholic version change that to?
@@michaelthorin5718 freemasons are not christian, what a load of crap they have no religion they tend to lean more to the satanic side
Every knee will bow and every tongue will confess that Jesus Christ is Lord.
Heidi, do you even know what that verse actually means?
@@easttexan2933 it means exactly what it says; “to the glory of God the Father.”
Yes, we Will all bow, but when? At the Great White-Throne Judgement or when we die and hear, “Well done, My good and faithful servant.”?😊
@
And as it is appointed unto men once to die, but after this the judgment:
Hebrews 9:27 KJB
And the great white throne judgment is reserved for those who’s names were not found written in the book of life.
Wrong. There is no higher or greater name than the eternal name of Elohim - יהוה
The Bible should not be changed ever!
You need to study your chosen translation (KJV I assume, just like me) and delve into translation and meaning of words in the original language. Use Thompson and especially Stong's. There is NOT a 1 to 1 translation between English in 2024 and ancient Hebrew or Greek in 30 AD; especially with cultural contexts. Just start with the word Angel in ancient Hebrew and se how many different words were used in original text(s). The fact of the matter is that if you've gotten to the point of understanding and identifying different translations and their differences then you shouldn't close your eyes and ears to all but KJV but rather you just opened Pandoras Box to a new level of understanding and you should be using Thompson/Strongs to understand the original meaning, language and context.
That horse sailed centuries ago.
All You need is in The Bible? But First you must be a Child of God or You Will Not Understand Scripture. Never listen to TV Preachers or Pastors, etc. or Read Commentaries , other Books. All you need is in The Bible . You can Read The Whole Bible in about 80hrs , just The New Testament about 20hrs? You WILL need a Strong's Concordance and Dictionary. Some Words don't mean what We think they do. I use a Thompson Chain Reference Bible.
If you’re going to take that position- first, you need to define “the Bible.” What is it exactly that you don’t want changed?
@@dondgc2298 What might your understanding of what The Bible is or supposed to be? The Bible doesn't require definition it has however been corrupted.
I still like the KJV. It is the only Bible that I own.
The KJV says in Heb.9
[15] And for this cause he is the mediator of the new testament, that by means of death, for the redemption of the transgressions that were under the first testament, they which are called might receive the promise of eternal inheritance.
[16] For where a testament is, there must also of necessity be the death of the testator.
[17] For a testament is of force after men are dead: otherwise it is of no strength at all while the testator liveth.
[18] Whereupon neither the first testament was dedicated without blood. BUT the other versions substitute covenant for testament. That is non-sense. A testament conveys one parties / persons will upon their death where a covenant is an agreement between to or more living beings / persons. Hebrews 9:15-17
New American Standard Bible
15 For this reason He is the mediator of a new covenant, so that, since a death has taken place for the redemption of the violations that were committed under the first covenant, those who have been called may receive the promise of the eternal inheritance. 16 For where there is a [a]covenant, there must of necessity [b]be the death of the one who made it. 17 For a [c]covenant is valid only when people are dead, [d]for it is never in force while the one who made it lives. - If you confuse who the Old Covenant is for and who the New Covenant is for as it is not the same as those under the gospel of grace who are able ministers of the New Testament you will be totally unaware of what the will of God is for yourself.
@@tims.449 You say that I could "confuse"..."who the New Covenant is for"....and (I) will be totally unaware of what the will of God is for yourself." Brother, Tim, I am 100% aware of what the "will of God" is for me---and for any man living (now) and also under the 'New testatment' --post Jesus--and that is: If any man repents of their sins and accepts Jesus as their messiah then they will be saved and live in eternity with the Lord. At the name of Jesus, every knee will bow.....and that is the message of the Gospel....the KJV is perfectly clear....AND...it is not necessary to have a law degree or an English degree to argue definitions and restrictions as it relates to God's plan (to redeem man from the fall). Repent. Believe in Jesus. That is the will of God.
Just be weary that newer versions of the KJV have their own edits weaseled in; the older copies are the most reliable.
@@IrisJoens Agreed
@@OwenAllen-z9b Owen, if you love Jesus, you will do his commandments.
If you don't love Jesus, you won't go to heaven.
Lifelong KJV here. I've studied other versions of the Bible, but I always end up coming back to the KJV. Not that.there aren't some good translarions other than it.
I'm 62 and after a lifetime of looking imto many translations I always arrive at the conclusion that the KJV remains the best preserved version of God's Council in the English language. Just my opinion.
Thanks for sharing. Have a blessed week.
ellison, The Analytical-Literal Translation is, without doubt, the most accurate Bible in the English language.
The new translations are copyrighted, the KJV is not. Making merchandise of the WORD OF GOD much?
@@williamlugmayer3429 william, were you not aware that the Crown of England holds the copyright to the KJV?
@@earlysda In reality more of a technicality - it is free to copy from.
Re; coming back to the KJV. me too.I do have the ESV is easier to read to a group, because the KJV punctuation is kind of a challenge. but i defer to kJV every time
My KJV Study Bible has this note - Many manuscripts omit “who walk not after the flesh, but after the Spirit.”
It almost seems to be copied from verse 4.
Not many, but some. The many are closer to the reading of the KJV.
You don't omit what's not there originally. What you should say is that later manuscripts added it.
That verse is so important. WALK in the Soirit and ye shall not fulfill the lust of the Flesh. There's the key to victory
My ESV says this in the foot notes: Some manuscripts add "who walk not according to the flesh, but according to the Spirit". As does my CSB. My NKJV and my KJV say some manuscripts omit the rest of the verse. These are my study Bibles: ESV Archaeology Study Bible, KJV Study Bible, ESV Study Bible, NKJV Cultural Backgrounds Study Bible, CSB Rainbow Study Bible (all the highlighting is already done, and everything is color coded by category), and ESV Journaling Study Bible (which I bought for my dad,but he'd rather use his phone, so it made it's way back onto my bookshelf) and a KJV journaling Bible. I use them all, mainly for the study notes. But my two favored ones are my ESV Archaeology Study Bible and my NKJV Cultural Backgrounds Study Bible. Those that I listed are the literal translations, which is what I stick to. I don't go for the thought for thought or the paraphrasing ones.
How can you fully understand a text if the text has been omitted? One of the most well known omissions is Acts 8:37. By removing this verse, the requirement “to believe” is done away with for salvation. Another common omission is 1 John 5:7 which states the Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost are one. How can removing a verse addressing the Trinity of God lead to an understanding of the Trinity? Furthermore, not all translations have footnotes. The KJV text does not have a copyright, but the NIV does. Every time the NIV gets revised (and there have been many revisions), a new copyright is created and more money is made. Tell me why “a better translation” has to be revised so regularly? In 1996, the “New International Version Inclusive Language Edition” was published in the UK which included gender-neutral language. Should the Bible be revised to conform to modern society’s social perspectives? Were these revisions about gender inclusion based on original manuscripts? Of course not. The Bible should change us, not us changing it. Sorry, but I fully disagree with your stand on translations.
right on,i dont trust any of these new translations either. woe on to them that defile the word of God for money or anything else
Yes, the only verse (1 John 5:7) that actually confirms the Trinity has been taken out. I don’t understand why.
Then you shouldn't trust your KJV because you are probably not reading the 1611 version but a later revision, especially the one brought out in 1769.
All that matters is i am saved by grace,thank you JESUS
By FAITH (which is more than belief. Understanding that Satan believes!!!!!)
Then why are there other words in the Bible?
By grace, through faith.
@@Als11able Satan does not believe that he is made righteous by faith in Christ because Jesus didn't die for Satan. Satan believes in Jesus' existence. He does not believe in him for salvation. Why is it more than belief in Christ? Did not the thief on the cross simply believe and he was granted eternal life. If not for one why not for all? Is God unjust? No. Then surely we are measured in the same way as the thief?
@@lionoffireraw Matt, the KJV was derived, and translated from the Received Text, the Textus Receptus (TR), a printed Greek New Testament based upon the majority of ancient handwritten New Testament manuscripts. The manuscripts that were used to create the Textus Receptus are known as the Traditional or Byzantine Text.
Romans 8:1. from the Textus Receptus:
*Οὐδὲν ἄρα νῦν κατάκριμα τοῖς ἐν Χριστῷ Ἰησοῦ· μὴ κατὰ σάρκα περιπατοῦσιν, ἀλλὰ κατὰ πνεῦμα*
The Morphological Greek New Testament text (which the ESV and other more contemporary Bibles use) is render as:
*οὐδὲν ἄρα νῦν κατάκριμα τοῖς ἐν Χριστῷ Ἰησοῦ*
Hence the difference in English translation.
However, personally, and although it is only recorded in verse 8:4, I believe that the more accurate translation is the King James, because it helps express what Paul is trying to convey better.
What Paul is saying, and what he means by *That the righteousness of the law might be fulfilled in us, who walk not after the flesh, but after the Spirit* is...
That this *righteousness* has NOTHING to do with Deuteronomy 6:25., or walking in the *flesh* and trying to earn an insufficient righteousness.
Instead, that this sufficient *Righteousness is for those who (are in Christ Jesus)* who walk after (or according to) the Spirit. Romans 10:3, 4.
All these modern age a,b,c,d,e,f,g bibles water down and snatched out scriptures it's sad. FATHER help us 🙏 in JESUS MIGHTY NAME
I don't use the modern translations due to the fact that the majority are from Westcott and Hort, who brought forth their translation based on the Vaticanus and Alexandrian texts. Both Westcott and Hort were occultists. When I first got saved, I got a KJV Bible and struggled through it. I then got an NIV and as I read through it, the verses didn't sound right. I compared it to my KJV and the NIV sounded like man said it and the KJV was of ALMIGHTY GOD. After I found three major differences, I checked my NIV and haven't looked back since. All the problems I found were wrong translations in the old testament.
Exactly, it's a well documented fact that Westcott and Hort literally used to speak to the dead in their churches. On top of this, Sinatiacas was written by Constanine Simmonides in 1840, and Vaticanus came out of the Vatican. People don't know it, but these newer translations are not translating from the original Greek. They are using Westcott and Horts' corrupted text, which has over 27 editions.
@williamlugmayer3429 How do you know they were wrong translations in the Old Testament? How could you know what was the right translation?
Why is my comment dissappearing?
NIV is translated thought-for-thought. KJV was translated word-for-word... But in the English from 400 years ago. That's why you see those differences. I'd encourage you to try comparing modern word-for-word translations, such as ESV, NASB, CSB, Legacy Standard Bible, to name a few.
You said it perfectly. NIv is terrible imo. aSo the KJV is a bit tricky to follow. Great. it makes us slow down and if we do that; we might even 'hear' God's voice. i know i have, many times
That KJV Bible was written some 2 to 5,000 manuscripts by 50 PhDs! I'M STAYING WITH KING JAMES BIBLE!
The King James Version (KJV) of the Bible was written by a committee of 47 scholars and clergymen under the supervision of Richard Bancroft, the archbishop of Canterbury. The KJV was published in 1611.
Those 50 PhDs have their interpretations colored by the same theology and doctrines of the 3rd century that have been used to keep Christ's promised "spirit of truth" at bay for 2000 years.
Even the KJV has been changed.
@leegmc1985 if you look at dates of printing before 2000 you know it's not updated !
Nothing should be removed
I use mostly the KJV and Geneva Bible to study, but I KNOW that the Holy spirit can teach the main message of salvation through Jesus Christ in ANY version. God is not limited to reveal TRUTH to anyone seeking Him. He knows what bible we have and how deep each person is capable of understanding. Hallelujah. 🙌
Yes...and he doesnt care if his words are corrupted
Amen!!! Exactly!!!!
@@RuffCut Well he does actually care. Revelation 22: 18-19 ( There will be Hell to pay ) but he can teach someone who just heard the gospel only ....and never even had a bible or anything
@@Kim-js8jf you get it...you are either studying God's words or you're not...."the main message of salvation" is distorted in all modern translations.....its beside the point how we are saved
@@RuffCut I bet you can't wait for the Ai version to come out then!
Thank you for shining a light on the issue of manuscript differences with your audience! You did a great job of emphasizing that the manuscript variance with this verse does not impact the doctrine that the Bible teaches. This is also true of the other small number of manuscript differences that we see in a handful of other verses, as well. Christians, along with academia in general, should marvel at how remarkably well-preserved the Bible is. There is no other document in the history of the world that even comes remotely close to the scale in which God's word has been preserved. Heaven and earth will pass away, but His words will not pass away.
I didn't know that! That there's no other document in the world that comes close to the preservation of the Holy Bible. Wonderful!! It's only how it should be, I know, but it's still wonderful!
Makes me happy!
I know nothing 😅 except the Lord died on the cross for me and rose again
So He died fulfilling His Old Testament prophecy about Himself so that you would know He was God and give up your sins and keep His Commandments sinner.
Revelation 1:17-18
When I saw Him, I fell at His feet as if dead. But He laid His right hand on me and said, Do not be afraid! I am the First and the Last,
And the Ever-living One [I am living in the eternity of the eternities]. I died, but see, I am alive forevermore; and I possess the keys of death and Hades (the realm of the dead).
Amen
Sad
@@captainchaos52 For I determined not to know any thing among you, save Jesus Christ, and him crucified.
- 1 Corinthians 2:2
He fulfilled prophecy! Isaiah 7:14 and 9:6! Mathew 1:23 and John 3:16! 🐑❤️
@@captainchaos52 The more you know the more you realize you know nothing.
Walking in the spirit, is worshipping in spirit and truth, Serving God in likeness of his character and Truth. The spirit we have is God's character, his nature, so walk in love, forgiving, gentle, longsuffer etc.
Amen
If you read the verse in Greek it is really explaining that those who are in Christ Jesus walk in the Spirit and not in the flesh…..so the first part of the Verse lays out that there is no condemnation for those in Christ and the Second part is stating why, so it’s not saying what people think it’s saying because some people believe you can be in Christ and walk according to the flesh but the Verse is telling you that people in Christ doesn’t walk according to flesh but the Spiri, you may not walk perfectly
The battle is then between the dominant soul and the regenerated Spirit there lies the real challenge.Do we surrender completely , your soul ( flesh) will battle for its supremacy it has always had.
@@DaChristianYute and even reading in English, or whatever ones native language, if you look at the preceding text it does lay out what you're saying. Romans 8:1 "Therefore..." referring back to what he was saying at the end of chapter 7, my paraphrase, wretched man that I am who will save me because I do what I don't want to do and don't do what I should do, serving God in my mind ( my intent, purpose, will to do right) and serving sin in my flesh ( my weakness, my reactions, my succumbing to do wrong) Thanks be to God, through Jesus Christ, my substitute to my sin. What then, shall I purposefully sin, of course not, but when I do, I know I am covered by the undeserved grace of my Savior.
In that case I guess I'm going to hell. I see no way possible to "walk in spirit" in this world. No matter how saved we think we are we are not a spirit until we die.
@ no friend, walk in the Holy Spirit that was Given to you the moment you are saved
Another reason I like the kjv The NIV says i get a room. The KJV says I get a mansion. Talk about watering down the word.
Actually some will get a room & some a mansion. Psalm 92:13
@@captainchaos52 i will be quite happy with a pup tent.
KING JAMES IS THE ONE TO STUDY. I ALSO HAVE ANAMPLIFIED BIBLE. VERY GOOD TOO
@@MargaretEiblThe Greek word in John 14:2 literally means "an abode," a place to live. Look it up for yourself: "Mansion" is not a good translation. If a fancy house is what you're hoping for in heaven, it's kinda missing the point!
The Greek word is generally translated as a dwelling place. What good is a mansion in Heaven? Aren't we supposed to be worshiping God for who He is and what he has done in Christ?
Imagine the most concerned and gentle voice you can when you read the next sentence. You don't know what you're talking about. The matter is much more complex than you realize.
THANK YOU JESUS CHRIST OF NAZARETH!🙌🏾🙏🏾 LORD, YOU ARE WORTHY TO BE PRAISED.
You made a great point that MOST modern translations go back to original manuscripts. Many think they are translated from the KJV bible. It is so important to research when you are choosing what translation to read. A "parallel" Bible of 2-4 translations side by side is very helpful!
No one has or claims to have the original manuscripts. What they claim is “oldest and best”. There are two manuscripts that they base this claim on, Sinai and Vatican (Sinaiticus and Vaticanus). Both manuscripts contain many archaeological issues that would undermine their claims of antiquity and reliability when closely examined. They have not been carbon dated and instead are dated based on the “shape of the letters” or “paleography”. Check out the book “Neither Oldest Nor Best” by Dr. David Sorenson for a great introduction to this topic. May God bless this message to you in Jesus’ name.
What "original manuscripts" are those?
@@wawabbit They go back to the original Greek and Hebrew manuscripts that were used to write the original King James Bible. That way they are translating from the original language into the modern language. This is the same thing that the KJV did except the translation was into the language of their day with all the "Thee and Thou" type speech.
@@sarahkelly7825 It wasn't the language of their day. Thee and Thou and ye were used to differentiate between singular and plural. As in when Jesus said, 'Ye must be born again', this was showing EVERYONE must be born again, not just Nicodemus.
2:01 The Bible says do not add or take away from my word.
It’s talking about the original manuscripts.
The King James writers literally had to do that very thing because they were missing resources when translating the KJV. They say so themselves in the preface to the KJV they wrote and published shortly after the KJV came out. To use the King James version of that verse to condemn adding to or taking away from the Bible is very ironic.
The one worldly thing the devil could manipulate, effectively misdirecting BILLIONS of souls straight into the abyss is the bible. I read the bible with extreme discernment, praying for wisdom and conviction daily.
Hell was created for the devil and his angels. How do we know? The Bible tells us. Without blood, there is no forgiveness of sins. May the Lord bless you. ✝️
@@Corey-MilkyWayWhisper Satan Was Given Dominion Over The Earth Until The 2nd Coming. Reference to satan's dominion over earth can be found throughout the bible. Though Jesus Christ when being crucified stated John 14-30:31 I will not say much more to you, for the prince of this world is coming. He has no hold over me, but he comes so that the world may learn that I love the Father and do exactly what my Father has commanded me.
@@viralswim Matthew 28:18 - Jesus says that all authority in heaven and in EARTH is given to Him. Satan does not have authority until the Second coming, he lost it when Christ resurrected.
@@nicholasseaman4858 Amen!! When the Devil is released from the bottomless pit at the 5th trumpet, Revelation 9.
❌ *I do NOT run ads on this channel (my conviction), so I make no money from ad revenue.*
➡ If you’d like to support this work, please consider donating🙂🙏
(see links below)
✅ Patreon link: www.patreon.com/lionoffireministries
✅ Paypal link: www.paypal.me/lionoffireministries
Also subscribe on RUMBLE: rumble.com/c/LIONofFIRE
I don't run ads on my Bible chatter podcast either too secular also someone that watches my Bible podcast told me that Christianity comes from Satan and man that Yahweh don't like Christianity
Hey Matt!, I like alot of things you've said in some of your videos, but, brother, I have to tell you that, You must Repent of what you've said in this video, cus, you just taught that we can use all translations of the Bible in English, and that there all inspired, and that the KJV isn't the Word, or that it isn't "enough" of God's word!?, brother, that's blasphemous!, listen, you've got to understand that, God said he doesn't want us all to be teachers, lest we sin in teaching something that is wrong and cause others to sin, or lest, being a novice, and filled with pride, we condemn ourselves in our human carnal understanding of doctrine and get in trouble with the LORD because we are unable to repent of the false doctrine we have believed ourselves, or have taught others to believe and were afraid now to tell them the truth because we might get hate and rejection for telling them the truth.And now this is the sad part, you have just taught tons of brothers and sisters in Christ, to believe most of the false doctrine that the world spews, and you just unknowingly propagated it, why? Because you've been decieved into thinking that this doctrine you've learned is right, and now you have taught that God's Word in English( the KJV) is not the right and only translation in the English tongue,but that we need another translation, or more so, all these other translations which will supposedly further the deeper meaning of the Scriptures, this you have taught in this video, and you said that words were missing in The KJV, you are unknowingly doing what the devil wants you to do, that is, teach that all translations are inspired, and that they are all profitable, that's a lie from the Devil, Jesus said that He would preserve His word forever in Psa 12:7, God inspired David to write this that he said in Psalms, 6The words of the LORD are pure words: as silver tried in a furnace of earth, purified seven times.[Which is the seven Bibles from Tyndales to the KJB , that England has made into English, that was getting more and more accurate, until the perfected word for word in meaning, KJV, came to be,]
7Thou shalt keep them, O LORD, thou shalt preserve them from this generation for ever. Which mean from Moses to David to now in old English, God has preserved His word forever, or else He wouldn't have said through His prophet Isaiah that we are to "seek ye out of the book of the LORD" in Isa 34:16, which means not every Bible is the word of God,but one is,the Kjv, and God warned about His word being changed in modern versions in Rev 22: 17-18, Anyway brother repent of your teaching in this video and tell people the TRUTH of the Words that God has made me tell you. Love you brother, and I pray you do better in Jesus Christ's Almighty name! Amen.
@@kevinbrown9378 The KJV is a good translation, but there are a number of good translations.
The KJV is not “THE” inspired English translation.
You might prefer the KJV. No problem there. But “KJV only” is false.
In the same way I could say that God’s only inspired Word is the Hebrew and Greek manuscripts.
So I believe in the “Manuscript only” position 🙄 See how it works…
We are blessed to have many good Bible translations, and in many languages today.
Yes, there are bad “translations” too.
But there are multiple good translations that are available to us in English.
@lionoffireraw that's a lie, don't decieve yourself so easily, God is powerful enought to preserve His word, for Heaven and Earth shall pass away, but my word shall not pass away, Go and read the translators of the KJV in the Didicatory and see what they say about the KJV being translated from the Orginal sources of the Hebrew and Greek, and go and watch the video that I supplied in the comments, and have a view of his channel.
@kevinbrown9378 when I see KJV fans talking about correcting the Greek from the KJV, it raises a red flag for me.
If versions are not important why did God say there is cursing for removing or adding to the bible.?
First of all that was at the end of Revelation talking about the book of Revelation. But, there are warnings for leading people astray ( wolves in sheeps clothing) .
Ironically, that verse was translated in the KJV by Desiderius Erasmus, who literally had to "remove and add" from the text because he had to do patchwork in order to complete Revelation in King James' strict deadline. The vatican wouldn't let him borrow the Greek manuscripts he needed to complete the work, so he had to interchange Latin with Greek and then somehow, had to figure out how to get it into the Old English of the KJV. Just read the preface the KJV translators wrote, it has all that important information. By the way, that's not to say that the translation of Revelation in the KJV is bad, because it's not. God can still use it to put forth His Word!
Very informative! And I will incorporate your phrase into my daily prayer -- "affection changes direction!" The Lord Jesus bless you!🙂
Watering down of the gospel in that the churches never mention sin and need for repentance
No more choir, no more organ/piano. loud guitars a booming drums instead. No songs from the hymnals, just worldy rock beat repetitive meaningless crap. looking for a real church, in a town fv 120,000
Thing is, so few see a problem with this and their explanations to justify it are at best; annoying. The wrong people are calling the shots. Thanks Rick Warren, but NO thanks
The KJV is the most accurate and word for word bible. Written by god chosen the true Israelites. All these other religious books that have been altered to hide the truth are a thought for thought book for man made lies.
I love you as a brother in Christ and pray for you every day. I also really appreciate your channel and have learned a lot from you. Since I grew up with the KJV I'm staying with it! I still read and study from my Scofield KJV that I've had for many years and is very precious to me. Thanks Matt.
It’s a great translation!
The same applies to 1 John 5:7
1 John 5:7 - _For there are three that bear record in heaven, the Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost: and these three are one._ (KJV)
1 John 5:7 - _For there are three that testify:_ (ESV)
I find that the KJV is far more detailed, self-explanatory and helps better, so, just my take on it.
The cases are not the same. The I John 5:7 text has no ancient Greek manuscript that includes these words. The majority of the ancient witnesses support 'who walk not according to the flesh' and a good majority of those include 'but according the Spirit'.
1 John 5:7 is a spurious text.
@@blackukulele you’re absolutely correct!
The reason that those words are included is to justify the Trinity, which was a later in the second or third century doctrine and I’m trying to remember the so-called church father from of all places Egypt that came up with it.
The unity in that Trinity the way it’s presented is that it’s a closed group.
It doesn’t allow for the plan of salvation to include the children of God as actually having the God DNA for lack of a better term plus the human DNA from their parents.
Of course, the word that became flesh Jesus Christ if you want to use that analogy has both the human DNA and the God DNA.
The Trinity duction would have you believe that we won’t really be children of God will be more like some house pet like a dog or a cat, but not God, but we are supposed to become children of God and you can’t square that with a Trinity doctrine God in three persons. I don’t really know what else was left out but this one definitely belongs dumped because it wasn’t in the Stevens text of 1556, which was a translation of the step two I’m pretty sure
@@e.richardscholz2338 I'm not anti trinitarian, but I see very little evidence that this particular verse is original.
The reason not all ancient manuscripts do not include it, is because the KJV, NKJV, Tyndale Bible, Geneva Bible, and Bishop’s Bible are the only ones translated from the Textus Receptus out of Antioch, while all others are translated from the Sinaiticus and Vaticanus, in which the Roman Catholics use to translate their altered translations.
The Textus Receptus was good for its time.
@@lionoffireraw So God let us limp along with an inferior manuscript all these centuries? Doesn't sound like a very competent God to me. Maybe he was just getting old and forgetful, and we had to wait until he remembered that he hid the best manuscript in his sock drawer.
The TR is a critical text derived FROM the KJV, NOT the other way around. Before the TR was made up, it never existed in ANY manuscript. It's a purely man made manuscript.
@@VOLKHVORONOVICH Always one. Read and apply, with a pure heart, and you will be confounded, not confused; as it, through the Holy Spirit, reveals itself to you, regardless of version. Ultimately Taking you to a version you 'may need'. May you be incredibly Blessed in so doing. And anyone reading this comment. The Bible 'is not' what you may think it is. It is most certainly the Word of the living God. But mock at one's own peril.
@@VOLKHVORONOVICHThis comment sounds so bitter. Why?
This is not the only verse they have removed from the Bible! I’m staying with the KJV…as it’s… in my estimation… the most trustworthy! Thank you for bringing this to our attention!😊
I feel blessed to have accidentally come upon this video (in my feed) where im meeting people who read and who revere God's Word!
"To this man will I look, even to him that is poor and of a contrite spirit, who TREMBLES AT MY WORD!." Isa 66:2
Thank you, brother. I never noticed that the second part was missing from the various translations I've used over the years. However, I've been reading from the NKJV for the past 2 years, and after watching your video I took a look at the verse only to find that not only is the second part of verse 1 contained there but I further noticed that last year I had highlighted it in my Bible because I'd actually never read it in that form before. This complete verse indeed sends a more urgent message to walk by faith and live as one who has faith. It seems that the Romans has more in common with James than many like to admit and this is the evidence.
We still have to be careful of any modern translations of the Bible, because I believe some of them may have changed the doctrine by omitting it, and then expect the reader to read the footnote, when it was never needed to be put in a footnote in the first place. There is nothing wrong with the KJV, and a point of interest, the KJV comes from the manuscripts from Antioch of Syria, while most (if not all the other modern day translations) come from the manuscripts out of Alexandria, Egypt, which are riddled with issues and do not agree with one another. The manuscripts from Egypt are the ones Roman Catholicism uses.
If you had written "many modern translations" instead of "any modern translations", your comment would have been correct.
Actually, the ALT is, without doubt, the most accurate Bible in the English language.
The Textus Receptus used by the KJV translators. Manuscripts compiled by a Catholic monk and dedicated to the Pope. Then the KJV only cult say that modern translations based on older more accurate manuscripts are "Vatican versions". The wilful ignorance of the KJV only cult is painful.
You have just proved that teaching of doctrine should come directly from the Holy Spirit, not from man's efforts.
The Holy Spirit leads us into all truth...the Bible of Constantine and Luther most likely was not put together ' in the Spirit '.
Teach firstly how to be constantly filled with the Spirit of Jesus, and how to have confidence in His Presence and comfort, and Godly education. Perhaps He leads you into all truth through the Bible or in other ways and means.
Assuming that the Bible is the Rhema word from cover to cover does not match up with God removing our stony hearts, replacing them with soft fleshy hearts and putting his statutes and commandments into our hearts...this matches up more with being filled with the Spirit.
Woe to any man which removes any or adds to the LIVING WORD OF JEHOVAH GOD. This is also in the BIBLE. The LION IS COMING, Pray and prepare yourselves America and world. ACTS 2: 38, II CHRONICLES 7: 14, DEUT 29: 27-29 Tick Tock America and world...time as you've known it, is short.
I have noticed this a few times and wondered why some translations never completed the verse.....
Now i now.
Thank you.
Just got off work and saw this. I grew up KJV only but for many years now i like the NAS bible. I stiil use KJV as well but my sister gave me her ESV bible 2 weeks before she died almost 2 years ago now. I treasure it and am getting more acquainted with this version. Thank you for all of this information and how you break it down its so good! always learning everyday ❤😂
I own about every translation... The ESV is beginning to be my favorite.
@GregTanner-x3t and here it is !!! The unhinged kjv onlyizm cult member! 😅
I have an extremely old version of the King James Bible written from the 1611 translation.
In it he is called Prince James, King of Great Britain, France and Ireland Defender of the Faith and it is called Holy Bible rather then King James Bible. It includes "The Epistle Dedicatory" written under his name, something not in the new King James Bibles. It also contains many differences to the new KJV, many words that differ and as a result I find the meanings sometimes differ as a result. To change a word alters the context and can sometime create confusion and questions. My wife who was raised on the new version even has issues with the wording of my old bible, telling me I am wrong or that it is wrong because hers is worded differently and she doesn't like the wording of mine. Even though hers was written far after, she feels mine is the one that's wrong.
Her explanation is that the newer version was worded in such a way to make it easier for people to understand but to me I find it misdirects people by it's altered meanings and exemption of some text.
Words can be powerful tools and when they are altered just in the slightest, they can have altered meaning altogether.
Some of the passages when read from the older bible then compared to the newer one seem to come across totally different, having an almost total different meaning.
the KJV is verifiably inspired.
100% Amen!
Amen!
One thing I have noticed is lately the KJV is under attack. Makes one wonder why? Take care
Who's it verified by?
@@JoyinFlorida see truth is Christ.
I don't like watered-down versions which is why I stick to the Old King James and I have read a Jewish New Testament wrote by play Jewish man who is a scholar and it sounds like the NIV
Thank you Matt, for that careful explanation of how important it is to read different versions in English so that we have a richer understanding of the meanings of the verses. May God continue to bless your ministry and keep you strong.
It is said that we never forget every single thing we have learned, heard, seen or done in our lives. That every millisecond is recorded. We may not be able to retrieve or remember most of it, but our soul knows and the Akashic Records has it all recorded. So when we try to tell someone about God, the Bible or Jesus, or even other religious teachings, even though the person may not be interested, he/she will never, ever forget. And know that later, sometimes years later, that person may remember something you said, maybe just one thing you didn't think much of at the time, and it will change their lives. So never feel your time and effort is wasted in trying to help someone, whether it's about God or about life in general. You never can know what will be important to them.
I was instructed in 2004 by the Holy Spirit to stick with the KJV. I was told, "Do not lean to the left, nor the right." I didn't know why at the time, but I did what the spirit told me. I understood two years later when I read a different version. Here's what I found. When you remove or add certain words, it give the reader the idea that this is the only meaning to what the scripture is stating. In example, when the KJV Bible state thou shall not kill, there's many ways in which we may kill someone without knowing. The other versions leave the readers attaching man's limited definition of what to kill does and could mean. Long story made short, the KJV was TRANSLATED from the original God inspired text, and the newer versions are man's INTERPRETATION to what was translated(theses words are similar BUT not the same). The Bible is clear about if you add or subtract ANYTHING from it. Hence, why the Christian community is so divided. There's more to add to this but this is one tidbit. Amen.
Actually, all more recent translations are drawing from the same manuscripts that the KJV was translated from.
KJV is a good translation for sure
@bibletruthbeingtold5673 Exactly spot on sister, also, when the words are changed, removed, or added to, it makes it nearly impossible for the scripture to interpret itself with other scripture properly to receive the full revelation of the word, especially concerning the parables. God is perfect, and every word that is written in scripture is by no mistake. The word of God says don't add or take away from the word for a reason. there are no errors with God. And, also, what I notice is that many times I hear people say that they don't like to read the KJV because it's hard to understand, not realizing that it is not by accident for which it is written that way. The word of God is Spirit and the things of God can only be known by the Spirit of God which take time to digest and requires patience on our part to wait on God's Holy Spirit who will teach us all things and not man.
1 Corinthians 2:9-11 (KJV) But as it is written, Eye hath not seen, nor ear heard, neither have entered into the heart of man, the things which God hath prepared for them that love him.
But God hath revealed them unto us by his Spirit: for the Spirit searcheth all things, yea, the deep things of God.
For what man knoweth the things of a man, save the spirit of man which is in him? even so the things of God knoweth no man, but the Spirit of God.
1 Corinthians 2:12-14 (KJV) Now we have received, not the spirit of the world, but the spirit which is of God; that we might know the things that are freely given to us of God.
Which things also we speak, not in the words which man's wisdom teacheth, but which the Holy Ghost teacheth; comparing spiritual things with spiritual.
But the natural man receiveth not the things of the Spirit of God: for they are foolishness unto him: neither can he know them, because they are spiritually discerned.
@@NarrowPath7 Amen, amen, amen.
Fantastic humble description. Some KJV only people are not so humble and say not so nice things about translations which i think hurts the hearts of the translators and researchers.
I find that both sides of the argument have people that are not humble.
Let the bun fight begin! Matt, you knew what would happen in here, lol. I read from six different translations because over time I wanted to find out what they are all like. Every bible is a gift from God. That’s it. I grew up KJV and still enjoy it sometimes. Now I have NRSV, NKJV, ESV, LSB, NASB ‘95 AND KJV. Each and every bible I pick up teaches me something new because a change in translation or a different type face can help us see what we may have glossed over by reading forever from one version. I love the word of God and can’t get enough of it! 📚📙📘📗📕📔📖🙏✝️💟🇦🇺
Haha I did know exactly what would happen in here 😅
I’m glad that you are blessed by all of those translations.
I was born again on April 17, 1967 while hearing the KJV AV 1611. I continue to use my Old Bible till I die, or Jesus raptures the church!
💯🎯 As you pointed out other Bible translations are done by translating from the ancient manuscripts not from the KJV… maybe people who cling to theories that certain translations are inaccurate need to learn koine Greek, Aramaic and Hebrew and look at it for themselves. Just a thought.
When we forgive there is no condemnation. Period.
" If you had known what these words mean, 'I desire mercy, not sacrifice,' you would not have condemned the innocent."
I was told NIV was published by the same publisher who published 'the joy of gay sex'.and has many Holy Scriptures removed.I am sorry that I don't remember which ones,but at the time I checked and it is true.without The Holy Spirit,we have no relationship.without a relationship with God,we are just lip service.I believe.Good video.God Bless you Matt.✝️🛐
I strongly believe in the Holy spirit who is here and our helper and comforter who will guide and teach us all about what God Almighty requires of us I'm this end times as we continue waiting for the soon return of Jesus Christ Almighty our Lord and Saviour and King 🙏
I only will read KJV and keep my grandmas bible in hand to compare them.
👍🏽👍🏽, continue to seek The Truth, speak The Truth and witness for THE TRUTH ❗
I am stuck on the NKJV. I just think it's a wonderful translation.
As they say, though, "the best Bible is the one that's open."
Hello! Thank you for your comment! I'm glad you chose to talk about the NKJV. I'm French, and I have an NKJV Bible. However, my first language is French. And in French, there are also several translations.
NKJV is my Bible too (I'm Orthodox so for the OT we use the Septuagint with the Deuterocanon books included, and for NT we use the KJV/NKJV). Wonderful translations.
Too many verses are missing from NKJV.
@@dudzinski324If you compare the verses, you will see that there are no missing verses comparing the NKJV with the KJV.
James 2:17 "Even so faith, if it hath not works, is dead, being alone"
I always try to look up the Greek and Hebrew for verses.
Some thing just doesnt sit right with me with modern transaltions. Why are some transaltions gender neutral. Thousands of words are changed every time they bring out a new translation, they contradict from each other, how can that be the word of God.. i started with nlt to esv and now have a kj journal bible..
bingo!
Good morning Matt and thank you for sharing this point. For myself personally, if I am looking at a modern interpretation of the bible, I ALWAYS CROSS-REFERENCE to the KJV. I look at the modern versions as tools when I'm explaining or for myself to understand God's word. It becomes a slippery slope when man is removing and/or changing the position of text in scripture. It makes me nervous because if someone is attempting to grasp the understanding and do not have the proper reference or teaching of scripture, this can cause much confusion, and we know God is not the author of confusion. I'll leave with this scripture; Deut. 4:2 - "Ye shall not add unto the word which I command you, neither shall ye diminish ought from it, that ye may keep the commandments of the Lord your God which I command you.", and again in Rev. 22:18-20. I thoroughly enjoy your channel. Keep doing what God has blessed you to do and may his grace and blessings abound in you.
Oldest and best manuscripts just recently found😅😅😅😅😅😅😅
Textus Receptus was good in its day.
I love the King James Version. To me it just reads more "majestic" . It, to me, has more of the "feel" of God's word. In either case, invite the Holy Spirit into your study time. He will indeed guide you. I once heard the question asked "What is the best version of the Bible to read?" It was answered "The one that is open!"
Jesus, the Gospel writers, Paul, and the other Epistle writers did NOT speak English. The New Testament was written mostly in Greek, not English. Certainly not King James English. The English Standard Version, and several other modern versions, are not changing God's Word simply because they differ from the King James Version; they are relying on the oldest possible Greek manuscripts that make up all the books of the New Testament. We have NO original manuscripts, no original Bible. Those who are convinced that the KIng James Version is the original are very mistaken, and they are not doing God's will when they insist that all Christians MUST stick to the KJV, becoming a burdensome stumbling block to believers who DO rely on the Greek, which is what we are supposed to be doing if we are seeking accuracy. This is not a new phenomenon. Christians have been aware of this for many centuries. Ask yourself this: What were Christian believers relying upon prior to the publication of the KIng James Version in 1611?
@DavidinMiami Yes, and what about the other 6,000 or so languages of the world? Are they supposed to learn English so they can understand the KJV?
@@dannoland Exactly! So many people in America are under the impression that King James is the original, the only true Bible. Which is absurd. That language is outdated. We say, "let the children come to me" now, not "suffer the children to come unto me." Suffer no longer means what it did in King James' day. So why are we speaking like that and reading that? It's very bizarre.
@@DavidinMiami Yes, well said.
True and very well Said
Amen, well said. I'm glad there are a few other clear-thinking Believers on this thread.
Classic illustration of textual criticism. Beautiful job!
The translations of the Bible that we have today are easily traceable to one of the two lines of manuscripts. From the Antioch manuscripts, (manuscripts from where they were first called Christians) we have the following English translations (not an all-inclusive list): Wycliffe Bible (1388), Martin Luther Bible (1522), Tyndale Bible (1522), Coverdale Bible (1535), Matthews Bible (1537), Great Bible (1539), Geneva Bible (1560), Bishops Bible (1568), King James Bible (1611), and New King James Bible (1982)
From the Alexandrian manuscripts (corrupted manuscripts, Egypt), we have the following English translations (not an all-inclusive list):
Rheims-Douay (1582), Revised Version (1881), American Standard Version (1901), RSV, NASV, LB, NSRB, JB, TEV, NEB, NIV, GNB, NRSV, NAB, NCV, NBV, HCSB, NLT, ISV, ESV.
There is a difference. This is why “bibles” read differently. They don’t all come from the same manuscripts. The very first attack that Satan made was to change Gods Word in Genesis 3:1-5.
@@privatepilot4064 amen
Yes exactly. God values His word and values us understanding it. If that is true and I believe it is then how could He have us using perverted manuscripts for hundreds of years? He didn't KJV is the superior.
@ Indeed. I was a NASV dude years ago and some KJB guy told me it was perverted. Well, I sat out to prove him wrong! The more I did the research (not people’s opinions), the more I couldn’t deny that the King James guy was right! God created the languages and He is capable of translating them Perfectly. Aside from holding every atom in the universe together. And I have no doubt (from my own research) that the King James Bible is God’s Perfect Word for English speaking people. People can argue with me about it, but I unbiasedly saw the proof myself. If He is able to translate His language into human, Hebrew and Greek, it’s nothing for Him to translate it into English. Perfectly. Why would God want us to know Him and not provide us with His Perfect Word to read? John 1:1 “In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.”
Thanks, Brother, for sharing this. I never knew that.
Revelation warns about adding to or removing from the Word. King James version isn't hard to understand.
And this one too: "Add thou not unto his words, lest he reprove thee, and be found a liar" Proverbs 30:6
The words know and understand sounds the same don't they? I remember years ago I had the KJV and in the story of lot, it reads bring the Angels out so we can know them. Meaning sex. But in another Bible version, my friend had said to bring them out so we can understand them. Just that one word changed the whole meaning. So we do need to be careful. Take care
Mm, indeed it makes sense. Though it should be pointed out that there, technically, it was only that particular book that Jesus was warning about changing. Not talking about the rest of the books and letters included in our Bible. There might be another verse that covers those too. . .
Thank you brother. GOD BLESS YOU.😊
Jesus wasn’t talking about the KJV.
Thank you brother - God bless you too! I've been reading several versions of the Bible, from different eras and languages. The text might be sometimes completely different, but the message in my opinion still has always stayed the same. I have no fear, since God protects his Word!
Amen. My choice of bibles are NKJV and ESV.
Thank you… you clarified an issue for me… God bless you!!
It is interesting to note that KJV vs modern translations use different manuscripts. It is also interesting to note that the KJV translators sometimes used a manuscript which was edited by a guy who used no textual references i.e. some verses aren't even found in a manuscript, he added or interpreted them in his own way. So always good for anyone to make sure they understand where their translation comes from, use multiple different ones based on multiple different manuscripts and understand that modern translations are in a sense more accurate (some like the ESV, LSB, NASB etc), while some are less accurate in their translation but try to convey more thought (like NIV, NLT etc... ). I personally use the NKJV and LSB. My wife uses the ESV and KJV... The important thing is to actually study the Bible, not just read it... Think, understand and learn.
Satan has dealt with you well, continue.
1 John 5:6 is another one, my aunt went for me on this one, lol. Blessings from South Africa.
So you just take their word when they say “oldest and best”?
And that they went to THE greek?
No, they translate from the westcott and hort greek text, which was invented in the 18:00’s and the “oldest and best” are really only two, error filled alexandrian texts one is called vaticanus(gues where that was found) and the other is siniaticus which magically appeared, looking brand new in the 18:40’s.
How about you do a video for the 15 other deleted verses?
Start with the one about prayer and fasting???
Mathew 17:21???
How do you teach the doctrine of fasting without that verse?
Thank you for your comment!
You don’t think the Bible teaches about fasting in multiple places?
The KJV is a good translation, but there are a number of good translations.
The KJV is not “THE” inspired English translation.
You might prefer the KJV. No problem there. But “KJV only” is false.
In the same way I could say that God’s only inspired Word is the Hebrew and Greek manuscripts.
So I believe in the “Manuscript only” position 🙄 See how it works…
We are blessed to have many good Bible translations, and in many languages today.
Yes, there are bad “translations” too.
But there are multiple good translations that are available to us in English.
Er, that specific verses is the only new testament verse teaching the proper use and power of prayer and fasting, the 12 were not fasting and praying correctly and therefore lacked the power to cast out demons.
This is not a minor verse on fasting but the most important,
Now address my other points?
You talk about “good translations” but the point you seem to be ignorant of, is that there are TWO greek texts, very different, one the received text, which was the text of the reformation and the one that took the bible around the world, all church fathers up to 1800’s, then there came two heretics and made up a fake greek text which is what all the modern perversions use .All the false churches that guys like you attack, they use modern versions like living, message, NIV etc.
Believe the gospel.
Amen 1 Corinthians 15 1-4.
@happydays310 Curious possible timings, for Christ's Second Advent.
1947+80=2027+7=~2033+ (Fall_Feast of Atonement 2033).
2000+30=2030+3.5=~2033+ (Fall_Feast of Atonement 2033).
We are saved by grace alone, through faith alone. When a person exercises true saving faith, they are born again. When a person is born again, this produces a transformation. The works that come from this transformation are NOT meritorious of salvation in ANY way, but rather are the evidence of the born-again experience.
This is the gospel of grace alone.
A cat meows because it is a cat.
The meowing doesn’t make it a cat.
This is why I am always so confused at the people who say the KJV is the ONLY translation that you should use. I am not saying it's a bad translation at all, but based on the oldest manuscripts we have, there are other translations that seem to be much closer to a word for word translation, like the NASB or ESV.
That is a great comment, tracy.
@GregTanner-x3t Greg, you have some anti-biblical ideas.
@GregTanner-x3t It's easier to read with paragraphs
Thing is: 150 years ago, it was the only translation in America. And everyone was happy. So along comes the new stuff and not there is contention. So does that say anything?
@@glenw-xm5zf People were happy with the Geneva Bible and then were very upset when the King James Version came out, claiming "it was a corruption of Scripture". So yes, it does say something: That contention can rise among people even when GOOD new stuff comes along.
Yes, good points there!
The 2-nd part of the full version of Romans 8:1 logically explains what its statement of the 1-st part implies, (and without this 2-nd part, the 1-st part remains rather obscure and abstract (but that would appeal to fleshly mind that doesn't look for implications of God's words because "it is enmity against God", His Spirit, Laws (as Romans 8:7 explains later).
Fleshly mind "prefers" abstract obscure formulas of God's word "to believe in" as in abstract dogmas (without explanations of practical implications of God's word).
Therefore many who choose to simply "believe" in mere symblical words/statements of the Bible without finding out their implications will have "symbolic salvation" from Jesus (as He pointed out in Matthew 7:22-23; Luke 6:46)
I fear GOD and takr his word KJV literally, don't add or take away from GOD'S WORDS!!!!!
Was the Bible was originally written in English? Did Jesus speak English? I challenge you to research it for yourself. KJV is a good translation; but there are other good translations too, which speak the language we speak (20th/21st century English). Of course there are poor translations also, so we need to be discerning.
There are several troubling changes in all the modern translations, including the NKJV.
Pray for the Holy Spirt before reading anything. Shalom
To anyone who thinks the modern translations have not been corrupted, I urge you to please research the words "Simmonides affair" and/or "Constantine Simmonides"
That has nothing to do with the Bible.
@ulusalani it has nothing to do with the KJV or the Geneva Bible. But it has everything to do with the modern translations, which come from the critical text, which consists of vatincanus and Siniaticus in which Simmonides himself confessed to writing Siniaticus in 1840. So yeah, you're right, it has nothing to do with the real bible but has everything to do with the corrupted new translations of the Bible.
Thank you for clarifying. Blessings on you!
I still am at heart a KJV only Baptist. However, I realized it's just not worth it to argue day and night with my own brothers and sisters. We're on a mission together. There are widows and orphans to feed, and the gospel go be preached. Gonna probably pick up an NIV just so I don't have to translate for others at my Young Adults group. Lol. I hope I can continue to grow this way, God willing.
KJV is one of the best translations, for sure 👍🏼
There are a number of errors in the KJV, as there are with other translations.
The Textus Receptus was good for its time.
The only perfect Bible is the original, in the original language.
What does a lamp represent in the KJB? How about oil? Light? Now read the parable of the 10 virgins. Half have lamps that give light, half don't. Now if a lamp represents the Word of God and Jesus is the Word of God, then what is the lamp of the wicked? Why is it the virgins thank they know Christ, but don't? Do these people know the Word of God, or someone else?
@@noonekennedy1282 "Thy word is a lamp unto my feet, and a light unto my path."
Good job.
Wearing out my Geneva 1560 Bible, published under the authority of Queen Elizabeth I, who also paid for it. It is perfectly translated from the original Greek (Pre-17th Century), Aramaic (NT) and Hebrew (OT).
Get a copy and always use it in parallel to all other translations.
Note: Start with 2 Thessalonians 2:3 in your version, and then compare it to the Geneva 1560.
0:32. Because its not in the septuagint, which is also not original text
FYI, the Septuagint is the Greek version of the Old Testament. Naturally the Septuagint would not include any of the New Testament, which Romans 8:1 is.
@@derrickpurdy7011 indeed.
@@derrickpurdy7011 translated around 300 years after the death of Jesus.
Why does it matter when it was translated?
I grew up with the KJV, and in my early 20's was part of a ministry that taught from this version in depth. One thing they pointed out was that ALL " italicized "print means it was added by the translators .Sometimes, it helps other times it can be ignored. BTW, my NASB version omits the latter part of Rom. 8: 1 as well. I believe the NIV, too. Nice presentation, Pastor ! Thanks!!😊
15 years ago in bible college, I did an in-depth study of Romans 8:1. One or two of the teachers were not allowing students to use anything but KJV. I went through all of the translations available on the You Bible app. 47 at the time. Only the KJV, NKJV and Amplified has the ending portion. We decided they were the ones who were incorrect. With 44 translations, some from further back than the KJV, only 3 were using condemning language right after it declared there was ‘no condemnation’. I haven’t used the KJV for years. Not because of that mistake, but as an eschatologist, I’d found many places where KJV wasn’t up to correct interpretation. There are enough translations out there that anyone can get the Truth of God.
“condemning language”?
Have you seen Romans 8:13? (written to born again believers)
AMEN to the OP!!!!!👏😊
“I went to bible college” lol
@jesusbeloved3953 Wasn't there any mention in Bible college of the Greek texts on which the New Testament is based? Did you look at any of those?
Good job. Most don't bother to look for the footnoted explanation, but prefer to simply jump to condemnatory conclusions.
A lot of people make a big deal over the very few times the early Greek manuscripts of the NT disagree. What is amazing to me is we have thousands of early manuscripts and the vast majority of the time they are in agreement.
That was the most important and,eye opening frase of the bible and now this one exactly is removed? ......
It’s once saved always saved. There’s another verse that does pretty much the same thing. Romans 8:9 in the authorized version says ‘but ye are not in that flesh but in that spirit IF so be that the Spirit of God dwell in you… another version reads ‘you are not in the flesh BECAUSE the Spirit of God dwells in you…’ notice the difference? One leaves the responsibility up to us to have the Spirit of God in us, by faith and obedience. The other leaves it out of our grasp that regardless of how we live, we have the Spirit of God.
So no matter how we live, there can't be any doubt that we have the Spirit of God?
@@EndtimesSheppard747 Who said salvation was by works?
@@EndtimesSheppard747 I have to admit that I'm not sure who you agree or disagree with in this thread.
@Dovebird7hopeJohn14 I think this is about as clear as it gets on the subject:
"They, whom God has accepted in His Beloved, effectually called, and sanctified by His Spirit, can neither totally nor finally fall away from the state of grace, but shall certainly persevere therein to the end, and be eternally saved.
II. This perseverance of the saints depends not upon their own free will, but upon the immutability of the decree of election, flowing from the free and unchangeable love of God the Father; upon the efficacy of the merit and intercession of Jesus Christ, the abiding of the Spirit, and of the seed of God within them, and the nature of the covenant of grace: from all which arises also the certainty and infallibility thereof.
III. Nevertheless, they may, through the temptations of Satan and of the world, the prevalency of corruption remaining in them, and the neglect of the means of their preservation, fall into grievous sins; and, for a time, continue therein: whereby they incur God’s displeasure, and grieve His Holy Spirit, come to be deprived of some measure of their graces and comforts, have their hearts hardened, and their consciences wounded; hurt and scandalize others, and bring temporal judgments upon themselves."
Westminster Confession of Faith, chapter 22.
@Dovebird7hopeJohn14 It's a late hour where I live, but I can't see anything in what you wrote in that comment that I disagree with. However, the teaching of Scripture is that the effect of being born again is that a believer leads a changed life. Take the Apostle Paul as an example: Before his conversion he was persecuting Christians and wanted as many of them killed as possible; after he was saved, that stopped and he instead preached the faith which he had once been determined to destroy. He wasn't sinless, however, and Romans 7 is very clear about the conflict between the old man and the new man within the believer.
Textual variants are so fascinating, aren't they? They actually lend credibility to the Bible too. That's because we have what is called "open transmission", which means we really examine all manuscript copies to find what is the most reliable. Something like the Quran has "closed transmission", which means they have a single set of manuscripts, and if anything else from that era is found, it is burned. The majority of textual variants that we know about in the Bible are little things caused by the copyist such as accidentally skipping or misspelling a word. And sometimes, scribal notes that were added in the margins somewhere along the way also get added into the text. The story of the woman caught in adultery where Jesus says "Let he who is without sin cast the first stone" is another example. It is most likely a true story, but not actually Scripture.
The Apostles all used the KJV and thousands of disciples used the KJV. If it's good enough for them, it's good enough for me.
Haha good point.
The apostles obviously lived 1500 years before the KJV ever existed 😅
Your sarcasm is used to go to effect!
🙏🏻 your eyes will continue being opened. It's not easy. 😭
Amen 🙏 May people grasp this truth!
YES exactly. KJV also has 1John 5;7-8.(the trinity explained in 1 clear verse) and as you say, you can work this out anyway.
Those who are truly in Christ Jesus do not fight or argue for their right to be like the world or sin. I agree with this video.
Faith is belief plus repentance (shows in action)
Very interesting. Thank you!
I'm with you brother, but prepare for the masses of KJV Only proponents coming your way now for what you said! 😅
I know… 😅😅😅
I just jokingly tell them that I could never use anything other than the Hebrew and Greek manuscripts 😂 (making this comment highlights how ridiculous KJV only is)
@@lionoffirerawLol 😅 The purpose of all good translation is to translate the original Hebrew and Greek back into the KJV! Yet that's what many KJV Only proponents might as well say and some even truly believe the KJV was divinely inspired just like the original biblical Hebrew and Greek! It's pretty wild, I can't wrap my head around it, but that's how many of them actually think. Mark Ward has a lot of good material on the KJV Only movement on his channel, not to mention his book Authorized: The Use and Misuse of the King James Bible, and just tons of other interesting things on the Bible, textual criticism, etc. 😊
Yes, my older NIV includes the rest of the verse in the footnotes, stating that it is found in later manuscripts. So in fact, that bit is added later than the earliest manuscripts.
Remember though to distinguish between Translations and paraphrase editions written by a single author.
I feel strongly that whether considered earlier manuscripts or found in more later manuscripts, we cannot take too much liberty to remove words from the text, which is the case in many modern translations. They don't even indicate in footnotes or in parentheses that the additional or different words were found in some or other deemed later manuscripts, or in the Majority text. (I find that only the NKJV took the trouble to highlight these significant differences in footnotes throughout its version of the New Testament). They already made judgment that these words were later added into text, but reversely, the judgment can be made that they were omitted from those few earlier manuscripts. The Alexandrian codices were themselves dated (if we can totally trust dating) about three centuries from the original manuscripts, and codex Vaticanus and Sinaiticus differ in many places. I also find it strange that the scribe would add a whole meaningful clause or sentences or whole stretch of sentences (more effort needed to copy) into the text. As many may be the spoken words of God (/Jesus), and His prophets and servants, we must NOT make liberal judgment to remove them from their translations. Human textual criticism should not be elevated above possible inspiration of Scriptures, considering we don't have the originals.
Critical verse, explaining who sinners and saints are; we know those that don't recover themselves from willful sin will not enter heaven, but us that do will hear; " well done good and faithful servent, enter into my glory". Condemnation for those not walking in the Holy Spirit, Jesus in us, condemned already!
I read the NIV (New International Version) since it’s easy for me to read. Is this translation okay or should I change to a different one?
The NIV is an OK translation. It tries to be as word-for-word as possible whilst still reading like normal English. The footnotes highlight the literal meanings of orginal language words if they have substituted in a more understand modern expression in the text. The footnotes identify key differences in the manuscripts and alternative translation options where there is uncertainty or other viable options. Get the NIV Study Bible and it gives you more useful information and explanations. If you want something that follows the word order and phrases of the original languages more closely go for the NASB or LSB or the NLT if you want something that translates the meanings of the original sentences into regular modern English without rigid adherence to the original language word order or historic/cultural words we don't use. And if you want a version that uses the same manuscript compelation basis as the KJV but translates in more modern English there is the NKJV and MEV. But don't worry. The NIV is a reliable translation and the Study Bible version is really helpful if you can get one.
Try and find Matthew 17:21 or 18:11 or even 23:14 in the NIV or ESV versions of the Bible. #KJVOnly
The KJV is a good translation, but there are a number of good translations.
The KJV is not “THE” inspired English translation.
You might prefer the KJV. No problem there. But “KJV only” is false.
In the same way I could say that God’s only inspired Word is the Hebrew and Greek manuscripts.
So I believe in the “Manuscript only” position 🙄 See how it works…
We are blessed to have many good Bible translations, and in many languages today.
Yes, there are bad “translations” too.
But there are multiple good translations that are available to us in English.
Also note that the KJV was created over 400 years ago. There are many words in this version that are outdated, in terms of modern English today.
I still believe that it is a good translation. But to say that it’s the one and only English translation for today is absolutely ludicrous.
@@lionoffireraw I'm not saying you can't get something from the other versions. But why chose good or better when you can have best?