Thank you for this video. I was under a pastor (now passed away) that, when he evangelized, was called the walking Bible because he had literally thousands of scripture verses committed to memory. He would preach scripture only messages (KJV only) on various Bible topics without comment (other than a Halleluia, or thank you Jesus, praise the Lord, etc. here and there). Anyway, thanks for your efforts.
Thanks for this I owe the Trinitarian Bible Society for convincing me that The Authorised Version. I grew up with the NIV 1984 given to me by the UK Gideons. I have both versions of NIV, ESV, NKJV and it is interesting to see what is left out. I didn’t realise the extent until i saw the ESV footnotes as the Gideons NIV has “disputed” passages in the main text in brackets and no footnotes.
Eternal Death lies to ensnare those who teach and preach from words inspired by the father of lies confusion is not the way of the one True God. Satan couldn't wait to get his hands on the Bible. Good message Brother
@@henrylaurel4476 if you don't want the best most accurate Bible that's up to you. Ever done research on the people who produced the critical text bibles? It might shock even you.
@@henrylaurel4476 Bible believers are not in a cult, yet your Westcott & Hort only heretics are in a cult... I'll stick with Bible believers... You can be one of the "Yeah hath God said" cult members.
I also am a king James person, but I just have to ask about the reference to KJV 1611 as though it was first, so to speak. I recently learned about the 1560 Geneva bible which seems to match the KJV very closely. I have read that the KJV only differs in wording by about 18-19%. I am thinking those divinely inspired men working for a less than moral King James pulled a fast one on him by merely plagiarizing the Geneva Bible and or he, King James wanted to steal the glory of such a well accepted and popular Bible. The devoted protestant leaders that fled England from persecution and execution by King Henry's daughter Queen Mary, (bloody Mary) as she was called by the people are the INSPIRED! men who ultimately gave us the Bible we love today I bought a Geneva bible and have spot checked many verses through out the Bible and they match very well. I for one feel a deep spiritual connection with these Bibles. I feel nothing when I try to read the new versions, might as well read a fishing magazine. A preacher told me oh, there have been many souls brought to Christ through the niv, that is probably true! However those who brought these corrupted books to them will have hard questions to answer when judgement day comes.
Here in Serbia we have KJV and NIV both translated to Serbian. KJV was translated almost 200 years ago and NIV just recently. Considering that many words From KJV are not used anymore, even tho I read KJV I often use NIV just as a translator to help me understand some old words or meanings, otherwise I wouiildn't recommend anyone to read NIV without knowing where the mistakes are. Anyways I wouldn't say that those NIV mistakes are intentional, it's probably just a translators mistake because he obviously did not know the text very well.
TheMtnMan From Tennessee Hi there :) I have the HalleluYah Scriptures, and while I do like it very much for certain reasons, I've noticed quite a few questionable passages and errors in the text. For example, in the Book of Revelation, it speaks of the 144,000 being "maidens" who have not been defiled with women. There's a big discrepancy there, just because they didn't want to use the word "virgins." Their method of translation seems to be more of a word-replacement, basically replacing a given word with a seemingly suitable substitute, and replacing it every time it's found in the text of Scripture. Sometimes it works, and sometimes it would have been better if they found an alternate word. I do like it, however, on many occaisions I found myself sighing "Why not just use the King James? At least I can trust it." :P
Dave Davidson Yeah, there are some issues with the HS. I would prefer a "pre-ISR" Edition of "The Scriptures." I primarily use the KJV, and then just use Strong's and other resources to sift through the muddy parts.
Well said, Louis. According to Rev 22:19, someone is going to lose their salvation for deleting from God's preserved w-o-r-d-s. When someone claims the "versions issue" isn't important, direct them there. That's as important as it gets.
The latest NIV addition abbreviates this by quoting below ‘SOME manuscripts’ so as to not get confused. Since earlier manuscripts had the word ‘yet’ and others don’t. So that it’s clear either way. Guys, I think we can get too hung up on all of these things...we have access to all translations if we feel the need to cross reference. Let’s not waste time and spend it more on doing the will of God :-)
In the 2011 NIV there seems to be a definite attempt to change anything which may be offensive to the pope. The early NIVs still had the "watchword of the Reformers" in Jeremiah 23:6 and 33:16: ,"THE LORD OUR RIGHTEOUSNESS". What reason could there be to change this to "the Lord our righteous Saviour" in the 2011 NIV except it be to produce a Bible which will be acceptable to Catholics, and thus make much more money? There must be something very sinister behind such a change as this.
Are you saying that the Lord cannot change his mind or decide to go? The thing is that NIV, ESV, NASB all says the same thing. KJV is based on Texas Receptus, lacking the new info in older manuscripts.
Extra Scripture References 1. The Universe is not spoken of as an infinite cosmos ONE time. It is mentioned over 40 times that the universe is the earth with a firmament bounded by heavenly space: Ps.76:19; Matt.24:14, Acts 11:28, Ps.9:9; 23:1, 32:8, 48:2, 97:7; Isa.14:17, 21; 18:3, 23:17, 24:4, 26:18, 27:6, 34:1; Lamentations 4:12; Nahum.1:5; Luk.4:5, 21:26; Acts.19:27; Rom.10:18; Heb.2:5; Rev.3:10, 16:14 2. The fact that the earth is a ball is not mentioned ONE time in the Bible. And that the earth is round but flat, directly or indirectly, more than 20 times: Isaiah 40:22, Job 38:14; Proverbs 8:27,31; Isaiah 44:24; Luke 4:5; Matt. 4:8, 24:29-31; Luke 17:24; Job 38:5,18; Job 28:24; Dan. 4:7,8; Isa. 66:1; Ps.32:13,14; 64:9; 2:8; Rev.7:1; Am.9:6; Jer.25:33; Is.11:12; Ezek.7:2; Rev.20:7,8; Acts.17:26,27; Gen.2:6; Gen.11:4, 3 The fact that the earth has edges and ends, indicating a flat surface, is mentioned more than 30 times in the Bible: Acts 1:8, Acts 13:47, Deut.13:7, Deut.28:49, Deut.28:64, Is.40:28; Job.37:3, Job.38:13, Ps.45:10, Ps.134:7, Isa.5:26, Isa.24:16, Isa.45:22; Isa.41:9; Jer.10:13, Jer.12:12, Jer.16:19, Jer.25:32, Jer.31:8, Jer.50:41, Jer.51:16, Ezek.7:2, Dan.4:8, Dan.4:19, Mic.5:4, Mark.13:27, Matt.24:31, Luke.17:24, Ps.21:28; Job.28:24.4. 4. that the earth rotates is not written ONE time in the Bible. But that it is stationary is more than 20 times: Ps.118:90; 1 Chronicles 16:30; Ps.95:10; Ps.92:1; Ps.103:5; Ps.135:6; Ps.23:2; Isa.45:18; Jer.33:2, Jer.10:12; Jer.51:15. Ps.77:69; Heb.12:26. And what happens if the earth begins to move: Matt.24:29; Ps.59:4; Ps.74:4; Nahum.1:5; Matt.27:51; Am.8:8; Joel.2:10; Rev.6:14; Hab.3:6,10; Jer.4:24; Jud.5:4; Ps.76:19; Mark.13:25. 5. That the earth revolves around the sun is not written once. But that the sun moves over the earth is written more than 10 times: Josh. 10:13; Isa. 38:8; Ps. 18:5-7; Eccl. 1:5; Hab. 3:11; Ps. 103:19; Gen. 1:14-18; James 1:11; Jud. 19:14; 2 Sam. 2:24. And the reference to the movement of the sun (the sun rises and sets) is found over 60 times in the Bible 6. About the dome over the earth: Gen. 1:6-8; Job. 37:18; Ps.103:2; Ezek. 1:25,26; Amos.9:6; Gen.7:11,12; Gen.8:2,3; Gen.11:4; Ps.148:4; Ps.76:19; Job.22:14; Proverbs.8:27; Is.40:22; Dan.4:7. About the edge of heaven: Deut.4:32, Deut.30:4, Is.13:5, Mark.13:27, Luke.17:24.7. About the water behind the dome: Gen.1:6,7; Ps.148:4; Dan.3:60; Ps.135:6; Gen.7:11,12,19; 2 Pet.3:5.8 7. About the foundation of the earth: Job. 38:4-6; Proverbs 8:29; 1 Samuel 2:8; 2 Samuel 22:8; 2 Samuel 22:16; Psalm 17:16; Psalm 81:5; 2 Samuel 22:8; Is.24:18; Is.40:21; Jer.31:37; Mic.1:6; Luke 6:49.9. 8. The fact that the moon reflects sunlight is not mentioned once in the Bible. But that the moon shines by its own light is said 9 times in Scripture, 2 of which are words of Jesus Christ Himself: Matt.24:29; Mark.13:24; Isa.13:10; Isa.24:23; Ezek.32:7; Joel.2:10, Joel.3:15, Joel.2:31; Rev.6:12.10. 9. That the stars are not far away and will fall to earth before Christ comes: Mark.13:24-26, Rev.6:12-17, Dan.12:3, Isa.13:9,10, Hab.1:4, Eze.32:7,8, Joel.2:10,30,31, Acts 2:19,20, Am.5:20, Am.8:9, Isa.24:23, Jer.4:23-28, Luke.21:25,26.
All your stuff has been refuted and convincingly. We use expressions like that today but i presume you worship at the table of literal gods. It says Jesus is the Lamb of God. I presume you take that literally as well. Much of scripture is given to match the point of understanding of the reader. Look up the Hebrew word for sphere.
The gospel is 1st Corinthians 15:1-4 NIV changes to believe on to believe in. Look up acts 16:30-31 they are asked what must they do to be saved. Look at NIV and kjv, NIV changes it from believe on (kjv) which means if you believe on something, it's to put your faith and trust in, NIV changes it to believe in, to believe in something is to just believe it exists. This is not correct, we are not saved by simply believing Jesus existed. We are saved by believing on Jesus Christ, trusting in his finished work. Not what we do but what he did. NIV teaches another gospel.
The gentiles like to say that whoever translated the kjv was a flaming homosexual but I was under the impression that the kjv was translated by 47 scholars and clergymen originally 53 and all that was overlooked by one man Richard Bancroft! So anyone know anything about this,or is it just more made-up bs?
Go ye up vnto this feast: I will not go up yet unto this feast: for my time is not yet fulfilled. John 7:8 GNV You can't have both. Yes. I use the Geneva 1560. Unlike there are 1000s of kjv bibles. The nkjv also had the yet in there. Go up to the festival yourselves. I’m not going up to the festival yet, because my time has not yet fully come.” John 7:8 HCSB
Aka the antichrist. People are crazy not to notice how horrible things like this are. Itll only get worse and worse. Sad to say I rarely go to church because theyre all corrupt nowadays....or most I should say. I know of 1 good church I went to with my Papaw before he past away(he was strictly KJV and now I see why). Guess how many people attend sunday service? About 5-10 people...Im sure you know of the 1000s of people that attend the corrupt churches...
God allowed a spirit to be a "Lying spirit" in the mouth of King Ahab's prophets... with the purpose of luring him into battle and killing him. (1 Kings 22:17-23) Now, I don't say that cause I think God is a liar... but, sometimes, God does things that... well, we may not fully understand.
+Delta Force Christians - The versions ALL came AFTER the KJV .. Nothing has been "added" to it. There are reasons for all these "versions". You have the Internet, research it for yourself. It's very simple. How to tell the KJB is the unchanged word of God: the Vatican HATES it. ALL I need to know. That should give you pause too..and NO, there is nothing added to the KJB. By the way - one of the Translators of the NASB repented for being involved in it! That too, is on the Internet. That, too, should give you pause. I pray you check these things for yourself.
@@TheMistysFavs WRONG! I read the excellent book by Dr White. MANY verses added to the KJV including the disputed text. Its really quite a mess. I have researched. Your turn.
I hear your passion David, I really do....but the unbeliever is more likely to be reading Playboy magazine than The NIV or KJV, the couldnt care less what they say
edwardpf123 corrupt bible? Don't be ignorant!!! The king James isn't the only bible. You realize the KJV isn't the first bible. There's hundreds of manuscripts to which were translated into modern bibles. The KJV isn't in todays language. Saying thou and thee? You should learn how the bibles are translated.
@@soldierofjesuschrist9748 It was the fruit and final English translation at the time. I believe the Dutch and Germans have their equivalents. It is the KJV that shaped the English speaking world not the NIv etc.
+Jun Acaba --- Jesus says so: John 7:8 -- NIV says: You go to the festival. *I am not going up to this festival*, because my time has not yet fully come.” Now look at the King James: John 7:8 - "Go ye up unto this feast: *I go not up YET unto this feast* : for my time is not yet full come" NIV says that Jesus says that He is not going up to the festival. KJB -Jesus says that He is not going up to the festival YET. That "YET" makes a *HUGE* difference..and that is only one verse. MANY others are changed.
2 Timothy 3:16-17 King James Version (KJV) 16 All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness:17 That the man of God may be perfect, thoroughly furnished unto all good works. Not sure why KJVO people do not understand this verse. Do you not know that Jesus preached in the from the Septuagint of which were translations copied because printing presses were not around in this day and age. He did not carry them with him everywhere it went. I see nowhere in 2 Timothy 3: 16-17 that states Only the KJV is given by inspiration of God. Nowhere. It says All scripture. There are hundreds of manuscripts that were found and the vast majority of them agree with one another so much that the removed verses in the new versions were not found in the TR. This issue of KJVO is causing major division amongst Christians and people are worshipping a translation and not what is important. Jesus Christ. I prefer the KJV but read ALL SCRIPTURE and do not condone anyone that does not.
Maybe they leave these errors on purpose so they can keep publishing new versions that may correct some of these errors eventually. Or maybe not, they're just corrupting the Word on purpose.
I know your comment is old but I still gotta comment lol. Its corrupt either way because on one hand its for profit and the other its to dimish the word of god. I use cambridge bibles because theyve been making bibles since the 1500s. They say the reason they still make them is "the king told us to print them but he never told us to stop"
+Arthur H -- That is just another LIE to get people away from the KJB. Just like that phony "Mandela Effect" You need to learn some discernment, and how to do research on the Internet helps also -- AND how to use Commentaries and Concordances.
@@TheMistysFavs What's a lie? Disputing the 'Rapture' theology? Spiritual discernment is far more important than filling your 'vessel' with olde outdated REVISED history. Having a form of godliness, but denying the power thereof; from such turn away, tis writ. I have not spiritual power, God will send his Midnight Cry of Matthau 25; be thankful for His mercy. God bless
John 7:8 in the Westcott and Hort greek text has "not yet" both times. The NKJV says in the margin that the first "not yet" isn't included in the NU. So horror of horrors, O:E the KJV agrees with the dreaded Westcott and Hort. EEEK!!!
Brother, I mean you no harm, nor am I against you or the version that we both accept as the most trustworthy English translation (KJV); but you fail to recognize the fact that the Alexandrian manuscript tradition, when compared side by side with the Byzantine manuscripts, are almost identical in content. Of the 200 or so variant verses that KJV onlyism points to as taken out of the text, they only represent 5% of the entire New Testament text. That means that 95% of the text is in absolute agreement. I love the KJV, and I study it daily. I used to be a KJV onlyist, offending younger believers that were saved by reading the NIV, or NASB or even the ESV. It took me many years of study and experience with other versions before I realized that the King James Version was a translation of the scriptures, into the English language. It is not the only trustworthy version of the Bible. I am well aware of Westcott and Hort, and the Satanic influence that was upon them. I am also aware of the fact that a copyright license requires a 10% change in the text every time a translation is made. For these reasons, and many more, I trust the KJV more than any other translation of God's Holy, written revelation. The thing that saddens me about this debate is that pride hinders most from seeing a very simple truth. When the Qumran scrolls were found, the world hailed them as absolute historical support for the Old Testament. Even with the many variants in the text, it was widely accepted that the Qumran scrolls were archeological/historical proof for the reliability of the King James/Byzantine tradition. When we discuss the Alexandrian text of the New Testament, and compare it to the Byzantine text, the variants are so minor, and only represent 5% of the entire New Testament text, thus showing us that 95% of the text is in agreement; it becomes a matter of pride, that causes division in the church. We argue over 5% as opposed to agreeing on the 95%. Satan has done his job. He has successfully created serious division in the body of Christ. Only by pride can contention come. I have learned to accept the Alexandrian manuscripts as historical proof of what we already possessed in the King James Version. The fact that the Alexandrian text is older, and yet is almost identical to the KJV text is proof enough for me that what I have in the KJV is trustworthy. It is what is known as corroborating evidence in the court of law. Empirical proof for the reliability of the extant text that brought us the KJV Bible. I have seen many souls come to sincere faith in Christ by hearing the word as it was preached from the NIV. All of the major doctrines of the faith are found in most of the modern translations (notice I said "most"). There are many modern versions of the Bible that are paraphrased, and therefore not true translations. I do not support or encourage the use of such, but the NASB, NIV, Holman CSB and the ESV are all good translations of the word. I have a copy of the Textus Receptus that I use daily when studying. I do not use the Nestle Aland text, but I will not reject it as heresy either. As I said earlier, it is as simple as finding an archeological discovery that supports the word. As for the New King James Version, I do not understand why you are against it. It was translated from the same TR text that the KJV was translated, yet KJV onlyists reject it. Do you teach people that the KJV corrects the original languages? Do you support the use of the Webster's 1828 dictionary above that of a Strong's Concordance? These are evident problems of the absurdity that is propagated by this movement. It is my sincere prayer that you would read this message and see the intention of peace, thus receiving the obvious truth revealed herein. A house divided against itself cannot stand. I pray that you would use the powerful voice God has given you and share this message. Stop spreading divisive rhetoric. If you wish to preach the Gospel, then do so. Use the KJV, for it is the most trustworthy English translation we have, but don't discourage others from faith in Christ that use other versions. Be an agent of peace. Blessed are the peacemakers, for they shall be called the children of God. God's best to you sir, in Jesus name, Pastor Brett
Pastor Brett NKJV was translated using the Nestlés text, which as you're well aware is the work of Westcott and Hort - their interpretation of the Alexandrian and Sianaticus manuscripts. They were not guided by the Holy Spirit. They were satanic occultists. Unfortunately *all* modern translations use the Nestlés text as the basis. Stick to the KJV. Regards, N. Ber.
Mr. Daniels, I am well aware of the only reason why you reject the NKJV. The problem in your stand is not for the KJV, but against it. I am absolutely convinced that the KJV is the most trustworthy English translation, but not the only trustworthy tanslation. Your position is obviously indefensible when you compare all the manuscript evidence used when translating the scriptures. Even the KJV translators spoke about the need for many translations. When you read the Translators to the Reader, you can see for yourself that the KJV translators were for the use of many translations. The New American Standard, and the ESV are the two that stand out to me as worthy to be called the word of God. They are both word for word, and not thought for thought translations like the NIV and most of the rest. The ESV and NASB are both word for word translations. They also relied heavily on the KJV/Byzantine manuscripts for their decisions on the more difficult portions of scripture. KJV onlyists believe in the KJV. You worship the book, rather than the Lord who inspired it. Rather than study the original languages to understand the deeper truths hidden within the word, you would encourage the use of an 1828 Websters English Dictionary. I have been a part of a KJV only movement. Great preacher and wonderful man of God. He loves the Lord. So does my present Pastor. He loves Jesus and loves to preach the word. He is also a very accomplished Theologian and worthy of such a title. I am thankful to study the word under him. He uses an NIV only, but I still trust the pastors teaching because it always aligns with the word. Both KJV and NIV. I always bring my KJV to church. I am not going to let pride destroy the work God has done and is doing in this church. There is only a 5% difference in the entire text of the New Testament when you compare the two different lines of manuscripts. The differences never change the meaning of the text! I will not be as harsh as you when discerning your studious nature. If you wish to continue preaching and teaching from the KJV, that is your choice. You have no God given place to condemn any one for choosing another version to read. The Latin Vulgate was the only Bible for over a thousand years. Was it any less the word of God because it was not the KJV? God has given me a perfectly neutral position on the subject, thus giving me peace when I read other versions. My 1st choice is the KJV, but I have a wonderful library, comprised of Bibles, concordances and lexicons. I have my Hebrew texts and my Greek texts for reading, then I compare them to the English versions in my library. I used to be like you, condemning people for reading other versions, and driving people away from Christ, rather than encouraging them to simply seek the Lord Jesus. Stop condemning other versions and the people that read them. Just focus on Jesus, and preach the gospel.
Pastor Brett. I don't know about the other guy but not all "KJVO" people are like that. Are there those who want to divide churches and make divisions, sadly yes there are but those are two groups: immature brothers/sisters or nonbelievers. I got saved by using the NIV and I thank God for it, however what those bibles lack mainly is growth which is part of the reason why I switched. I know a lot plays into that like: how well the pastor is teaching, my attitude towards learning, etc. but your just being presumptuous and thinking that "KJV people divide churches all the time" that's not true. My pastor taught us that the verse in 1 John 5:7 "the heavenly wittiness" is a counterfeit verse that they added and my pastor learns this from other pastors who came from "Christian schools". Very person who made/maintains modern versions do not like the KJV or anything related to it. This is a fight that started long before you or me, by the way, look at Chicktracts videos more carefully. They aren't those church dividers as you proclaim.
Pastor Brett, yes perhaps only a 5% difference, but most of those directly deal with the divinity of Christ. Please go to codexsinaiticus.org and see for yourself up close what the bad joke that all modern versions are based on really looks like.
Thank you for this video. I was under a pastor (now passed away) that, when he evangelized, was called the walking Bible because he had literally thousands of scripture verses committed to memory. He would preach scripture only messages (KJV only) on various Bible topics without comment (other than a Halleluia, or thank you Jesus, praise the Lord, etc. here and there). Anyway, thanks for your efforts.
I appreciate you David Daniels. I believe you are God sent.
NIV....New Inaccurate Version
Never Ignore Vitriol
@@samlawrence2695 wow you're sold on commercial bibles aren't you?
NIV--Never Inspired Version.
Lost for words.
Thank you. That’s all I can offer
Well said again. Thank you for your ministry.
Thanks for this I owe the Trinitarian Bible Society for convincing me that The Authorised Version. I grew up with the NIV 1984 given to me by the UK Gideons. I have both versions of NIV, ESV, NKJV and it is interesting to see what is left out. I didn’t realise the extent until i saw the ESV footnotes as the Gideons NIV has “disputed” passages in the main text in brackets and no footnotes.
Eternal Death lies to ensnare those who teach and preach from words inspired by the father of lies confusion is not the way of the one True God. Satan couldn't wait to get his hands on the Bible. Good message Brother
@@henrylaurel4476 if you don't want the best most accurate Bible that's up to you.
Ever done research on the people who produced the critical text bibles? It might shock even you.
@@henrylaurel4476 Bible believers are not in a cult, yet your Westcott & Hort only heretics are in a cult...
I'll stick with Bible believers... You can be one of the "Yeah hath God said" cult members.
Amen David another great video
Amen!
NIV and all other modern translations?? NOOO, NOOO, NOOO, NOOO,...…...
I also am a king James person, but I just have to ask about the reference to KJV 1611 as though it was first, so to speak. I recently learned about the 1560 Geneva bible which seems to match the KJV very closely. I have read that the KJV only differs in wording by about 18-19%. I am thinking those divinely inspired men working for a less than moral King James pulled a fast one on him by merely plagiarizing the Geneva Bible and or he, King James wanted to steal the glory of such a well accepted and popular Bible. The devoted protestant leaders that fled England from persecution and execution by King Henry's daughter Queen Mary, (bloody Mary) as she was called by the people are the INSPIRED! men who ultimately gave us the Bible we love today I bought a Geneva bible and have spot checked many verses through out the Bible and they match very well. I for one feel a deep spiritual connection with these Bibles. I feel nothing when I try to read the new versions, might as well read a fishing magazine. A preacher told me oh, there have been many souls brought to Christ through the niv, that is probably true! However those who brought these corrupted books to them will have hard questions to answer when judgement day comes.
The problem with the Geneva was the commentary for the most part. Some of it was right but there was some wrong. I have this bible as well.
I think the KJV is closest to the Tyndale Bible. I should google it.
Here in Serbia we have KJV and NIV both translated to Serbian. KJV was translated almost 200 years ago and NIV just recently. Considering that many words From KJV are not used anymore, even tho I read KJV I often use NIV just as a translator to help me understand some old words or meanings, otherwise I wouiildn't recommend anyone to read NIV without knowing where the mistakes are.
Anyways I wouldn't say that those NIV mistakes are intentional, it's probably just a translators mistake because he obviously did not know the text very well.
Amen brother
I have been using a NIV for 30 years and grown in Christ so people don't panic, but I have bought a King James Version.
Hey Jimini, check out the HalleluYah Scriptures, or one titled simply, The Scriptures, 4th ed. Restored names, and closer to the original manuscripts.
TheMtnMan From Tennessee Thanks nice to hear from you again
TheMtnMan From Tennessee Hi there :) I have the HalleluYah Scriptures, and while I do like it very much for certain reasons, I've noticed quite a few questionable passages and errors in the text. For example, in the Book of Revelation, it speaks of the 144,000 being "maidens" who have not been defiled with women. There's a big discrepancy there, just because they didn't want to use the word "virgins." Their method of translation seems to be more of a word-replacement, basically replacing a given word with a seemingly suitable substitute, and replacing it every time it's found in the text of Scripture. Sometimes it works, and sometimes it would have been better if they found an alternate word.
I do like it, however, on many occaisions I found myself sighing "Why not just use the King James? At least I can trust it." :P
Dave Davidson Yeah, there are some issues with the HS. I would prefer a "pre-ISR" Edition of "The Scriptures." I primarily use the KJV, and then just use Strong's and other resources to sift through the muddy parts.
The King James wins everytime ... just the way it is written.
Does the niv etc modern versions, when they leave out " without a cause" from Matthew 5-22 , if you're angry with your brother, make Jesus a sinner.
NIV is wicked.
do yall send whole bibles to other countries? the other ministries who do this use other versions
The King James Version descended to earth from heaven, leather bound and gilt edged.
If only it had landed on your head.....A pulpit one preferably.
niv…...not inspired version
Never
Invert
Verses.
Look how they changed NIV by Chicktract: Amen I agreed. I’m aware of Rev.22:18-19. So don’t forget about it!! ☝🏼😐
Well said, Louis. According to Rev 22:19, someone is going to lose their salvation for deleting from God's preserved w-o-r-d-s. When someone claims the "versions issue" isn't important, direct them there. That's as important as it gets.
Thank you
The latest NIV addition abbreviates this by quoting below ‘SOME manuscripts’ so as to not get confused. Since earlier manuscripts had the word ‘yet’ and others don’t. So that it’s clear either way.
Guys, I think we can get too hung up on all of these things...we have access to all translations if we feel the need to cross reference. Let’s not waste time and spend it more on doing the will of God :-)
You don't get it...The right wording should be in John 7:8, shouldn't it, since John 7:8 is part of God's Word. That's the point, do you get it now???
In the 2011 NIV there seems to be a definite attempt to change anything which may be offensive to the pope. The early NIVs still had the "watchword of the Reformers" in Jeremiah 23:6 and 33:16: ,"THE LORD OUR RIGHTEOUSNESS". What reason could there be to change this to "the Lord our righteous Saviour" in the 2011 NIV except it be to produce a Bible which will be acceptable to Catholics, and thus make much more money? There must be something very sinister behind such a change as this.
Are you saying that the Lord cannot change his mind or decide to go?
The thing is that NIV, ESV, NASB all says the same thing. KJV is based on Texas Receptus, lacking the new info in older manuscripts.
ohhhhh my goodness. This is what produces Bart Erhman's ...
Amen
I have two questions, did Jael or Barak kill Cicero and was Abimelech really killed by a woman?
Read your KJV Bible for an Answer :-)
Amen!!!!!
Extra Scripture References
1. The Universe is not spoken of as an infinite cosmos ONE time. It is mentioned over 40 times that the universe is the earth with a firmament bounded by heavenly space:
Ps.76:19; Matt.24:14, Acts 11:28, Ps.9:9; 23:1, 32:8, 48:2, 97:7; Isa.14:17, 21; 18:3, 23:17, 24:4, 26:18, 27:6, 34:1; Lamentations 4:12; Nahum.1:5; Luk.4:5, 21:26; Acts.19:27; Rom.10:18; Heb.2:5; Rev.3:10, 16:14
2. The fact that the earth is a ball is not mentioned ONE time in the Bible. And that the earth is round but flat, directly or indirectly, more than 20 times:
Isaiah 40:22, Job 38:14; Proverbs 8:27,31; Isaiah 44:24; Luke 4:5; Matt. 4:8, 24:29-31; Luke 17:24; Job 38:5,18; Job 28:24; Dan. 4:7,8; Isa. 66:1; Ps.32:13,14; 64:9; 2:8; Rev.7:1; Am.9:6; Jer.25:33; Is.11:12; Ezek.7:2; Rev.20:7,8; Acts.17:26,27; Gen.2:6; Gen.11:4,
3 The fact that the earth has edges and ends, indicating a flat surface, is mentioned more than 30 times in the Bible:
Acts 1:8, Acts 13:47, Deut.13:7, Deut.28:49, Deut.28:64, Is.40:28; Job.37:3, Job.38:13, Ps.45:10, Ps.134:7, Isa.5:26, Isa.24:16, Isa.45:22; Isa.41:9; Jer.10:13, Jer.12:12, Jer.16:19, Jer.25:32, Jer.31:8, Jer.50:41, Jer.51:16, Ezek.7:2, Dan.4:8, Dan.4:19, Mic.5:4, Mark.13:27, Matt.24:31, Luke.17:24, Ps.21:28; Job.28:24.4.
4. that the earth rotates is not written ONE time in the Bible. But that it is stationary is more than 20 times:
Ps.118:90; 1 Chronicles 16:30; Ps.95:10; Ps.92:1; Ps.103:5; Ps.135:6; Ps.23:2; Isa.45:18; Jer.33:2, Jer.10:12; Jer.51:15. Ps.77:69; Heb.12:26.
And what happens if the earth begins to move:
Matt.24:29; Ps.59:4; Ps.74:4; Nahum.1:5; Matt.27:51; Am.8:8; Joel.2:10; Rev.6:14; Hab.3:6,10; Jer.4:24; Jud.5:4; Ps.76:19; Mark.13:25.
5. That the earth revolves around the sun is not written once. But that the sun moves over the earth is written more than 10 times:
Josh. 10:13; Isa. 38:8; Ps. 18:5-7; Eccl. 1:5; Hab. 3:11; Ps. 103:19; Gen. 1:14-18; James 1:11; Jud. 19:14; 2 Sam. 2:24. And the reference to the movement of the sun (the sun rises and sets) is found over 60 times in the Bible
6. About the dome over the earth:
Gen. 1:6-8; Job. 37:18; Ps.103:2; Ezek. 1:25,26; Amos.9:6; Gen.7:11,12; Gen.8:2,3; Gen.11:4; Ps.148:4; Ps.76:19; Job.22:14; Proverbs.8:27; Is.40:22; Dan.4:7.
About the edge of heaven:
Deut.4:32, Deut.30:4, Is.13:5, Mark.13:27, Luke.17:24.7.
About the water behind the dome:
Gen.1:6,7; Ps.148:4; Dan.3:60; Ps.135:6; Gen.7:11,12,19; 2 Pet.3:5.8
7. About the foundation of the earth:
Job. 38:4-6; Proverbs 8:29; 1 Samuel 2:8; 2 Samuel 22:8; 2 Samuel 22:16; Psalm 17:16; Psalm 81:5; 2 Samuel 22:8; Is.24:18; Is.40:21; Jer.31:37; Mic.1:6; Luke 6:49.9.
8. The fact that the moon reflects sunlight is not mentioned once in the Bible. But that the moon shines by its own light is said 9 times in Scripture, 2 of which are words of Jesus Christ Himself: Matt.24:29; Mark.13:24; Isa.13:10; Isa.24:23; Ezek.32:7; Joel.2:10, Joel.3:15, Joel.2:31; Rev.6:12.10.
9. That the stars are not far away and will fall to earth before Christ comes:
Mark.13:24-26, Rev.6:12-17, Dan.12:3, Isa.13:9,10, Hab.1:4, Eze.32:7,8, Joel.2:10,30,31, Acts 2:19,20, Am.5:20, Am.8:9, Isa.24:23, Jer.4:23-28, Luke.21:25,26.
All your stuff has been refuted and convincingly. We use expressions like that today but i presume you worship at the table of literal gods. It says Jesus is the Lamb of God. I presume you take that literally as well. Much of scripture is given to match the point of understanding of the reader. Look up the Hebrew word for sphere.
NKJV for me. Same manuscripts, same everything. AND I CAN UNDERSTAND IT
You best check out your NKJV again via the facts of what it used for texts.
You are going to love this.
*Love*!! "Ryan Reeds - Apostolic Fathers : The First Christians...
Wooo! doggeh!
You gonna love It.
All English version of the Bible comes from the Tyndale‘s version including the King James version.
They've been busy changing words in the KJV. Check out the Holman publisher version and Hendrickson. Holman changes words. Beware brethren.
The gospel is 1st Corinthians 15:1-4 NIV changes to believe on to believe in. Look up acts 16:30-31 they are asked what must they do to be saved. Look at NIV and kjv, NIV changes it from believe on (kjv) which means if you believe on something, it's to put your faith and trust in, NIV changes it to believe in, to believe in something is to just believe it exists. This is not correct, we are not saved by simply believing Jesus existed. We are saved by believing on Jesus Christ, trusting in his finished work. Not what we do but what he did. NIV teaches another gospel.
@@henrylaurel4476 you think im a 7th day Adventist 🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣😂😂😂😂
@@henrylaurel4476 1st Corinthians comes right out and says this is the Gospel. Dont let your false pride blind you
The gentiles like to say that whoever translated the kjv was a flaming homosexual but I was under the impression that the kjv was translated by 47 scholars and clergymen originally 53 and all that was overlooked by one man Richard Bancroft! So anyone know anything about this,or is it just more made-up bs?
Go ye up vnto this feast: I will not go up yet unto this feast: for my time is not yet fulfilled.
John 7:8 GNV
You can't have both. Yes. I use the Geneva 1560. Unlike there are 1000s of kjv bibles. The nkjv also had the yet in there.
Go up to the festival yourselves. I’m not going up to the festival yet, because my time has not yet fully come.”
John 7:8 HCSB
The NIV is a great translation just like the KJV is a great translation
Na man
Also pretty much all new translations have a badly translated 2nd Samuel 21:19
The NLT is most accurate to me.
Never
Ignore
Vitriol
Would love to hear your thoughts/critique on "The Story".
In their Next Revision, they will call GOD, " he/she".
They will use these new Bible "truths'' to accept a "New" Christ that "is'' "perfect'' because Jesus came "close" but not close enough.
Aka the antichrist. People are crazy not to notice how horrible things like this are. Itll only get worse and worse. Sad to say I rarely go to church because theyre all corrupt nowadays....or most I should say. I know of 1 good church I went to with my Papaw before he past away(he was strictly KJV and now I see why). Guess how many people attend sunday service? About 5-10 people...Im sure you know of the 1000s of people that attend the corrupt churches...
God allowed a spirit to be a "Lying spirit" in the mouth of King Ahab's prophets... with the purpose of luring him into battle and killing him. (1 Kings 22:17-23)
Now, I don't say that cause I think God is a liar... but, sometimes, God does things that... well, we may not fully understand.
NASB sinners. Verses were ADDED to the KJV.
+Delta Force Christians - The versions ALL came AFTER the KJV .. Nothing has been "added" to it. There are reasons for all these "versions". You have the Internet, research it for yourself. It's very simple. How to tell the KJB is the unchanged word of God: the Vatican HATES it. ALL I need to know. That should give you pause too..and NO, there is nothing added to the KJB. By the way - one of the Translators of the NASB repented for being involved in it! That too, is on the Internet. That, too, should give you pause. I pray you check these things for yourself.
@@TheMistysFavs WRONG! I read the excellent book by Dr White. MANY verses added to the KJV including the disputed text. Its really quite a mess. I have researched. Your turn.
They have also changed the KJV over the years. The 1611 is very different than the 1769. The Oxford is dissent than the Cambridge.
I read from the KJV, NKJV, and NIV. When I see a discrepancy, such as pointed out in this video, I incorporate it in the NKJV and/or The NIV.
I hear your passion David, I really do....but the unbeliever is more likely to be reading Playboy magazine than The NIV or KJV, the couldnt care less what they say
The point is you might give it to them as a gift. Don't give them a corrupt bible, give them the true Bible, the KJB.
edwardpf123 corrupt bible? Don't be ignorant!!! The king James isn't the only bible. You realize the KJV isn't the first bible. There's hundreds of manuscripts to which were translated into modern bibles. The KJV isn't in todays language. Saying thou and thee? You should learn how the bibles are translated.
@@soldierofjesuschrist9748 It was the fruit and final English translation at the time. I believe the Dutch and Germans have their equivalents. It is the KJV that shaped the English speaking world not the NIv etc.
Where is the difference there?
+Jun Acaba --- Jesus says so: John 7:8 -- NIV says: You go to the festival. *I am not going up to this festival*, because my time has not yet fully come.”
Now look at the King James:
John 7:8 - "Go ye up unto this feast: *I go not up YET unto this feast* : for my time is not yet full come"
NIV says that Jesus says that He is not going up to the festival. KJB -Jesus says that He is not going up to the festival YET. That "YET" makes a *HUGE* difference..and that is only one verse. MANY others are changed.
prettey much the same to me.
2 Timothy 3:16-17 King James Version (KJV)
16 All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness:17 That the man of God may be perfect, thoroughly furnished unto all good works.
Not sure why KJVO people do not understand this verse. Do you not know that Jesus preached in the from the Septuagint of which were translations copied because printing presses were not around in this day and age. He did not carry them with him everywhere it went. I see nowhere in 2 Timothy 3: 16-17 that states Only the KJV is given by inspiration of God. Nowhere. It says All scripture. There are hundreds of manuscripts that were found and the vast majority of them agree with one another so much that the removed verses in the new versions were not found in the TR. This issue of KJVO is causing major division amongst Christians and people are worshipping a translation and not what is important. Jesus Christ. I prefer the KJV but read ALL SCRIPTURE and do not condone anyone that does not.
Maybe they leave these errors on purpose so they can keep publishing new versions that may correct some of these errors eventually. Or maybe not, they're just corrupting the Word on purpose.
I know your comment is old but I still gotta comment lol. Its corrupt either way because on one hand its for profit and the other its to dimish the word of god. I use cambridge bibles because theyve been making bibles since the 1500s. They say the reason they still make them is "the king told us to print them but he never told us to stop"
"God bless you all!" Except for those of you who use the NIV, apparently.
I don't touch those funny "Bibles". KJV ... and yes, I do use the NKJV too.
'And that's not bringing up the fact that King James may have been a homosexual.'
+Arthur H -- That is just another LIE to get people away from the KJB. Just like that phony "Mandela Effect" You need to learn some discernment, and how to do research on the Internet helps also -- AND how to use Commentaries and Concordances.
@@TheMistysFavs What's a lie? Disputing the 'Rapture' theology? Spiritual discernment is far more important than filling your 'vessel' with olde outdated REVISED history.
Having a form of godliness, but denying the power thereof; from such turn away, tis writ. I have not spiritual power, God will send his Midnight Cry of Matthau 25; be thankful for His mercy. God bless
John 7:8 in the Westcott and Hort greek text has "not yet" both times. The NKJV says in the margin that the first "not yet" isn't included in the NU. So horror of horrors, O:E the KJV agrees with the dreaded Westcott and Hort. EEEK!!!
Brother,
I mean you no harm, nor am I against you or the version that we both accept as the most trustworthy English translation (KJV); but you fail to recognize the fact that the Alexandrian manuscript tradition, when compared side by side with the Byzantine manuscripts, are almost identical in content. Of the 200 or so variant verses that KJV onlyism points to as taken out of the text, they only represent 5% of the entire New Testament text. That means that 95% of the text is in absolute agreement. I love the KJV, and I study it daily. I used to be a KJV onlyist, offending younger believers that were saved by reading the NIV, or NASB or even the ESV. It took me many years of study and experience with other versions before I realized that the King James Version was a translation of the scriptures, into the English language. It is not the only trustworthy version of the Bible.
I am well aware of Westcott and Hort, and the Satanic influence that was upon them. I am also aware of the fact that a copyright license requires a 10% change in the text every time a translation is made. For these reasons, and many more, I trust the KJV more than any other translation of God's Holy, written revelation. The thing that saddens me about this debate is that pride hinders most from seeing a very simple truth. When the Qumran scrolls were found, the world hailed them as absolute historical support for the Old Testament. Even with the many variants in the text, it was widely accepted that the Qumran scrolls were archeological/historical proof for the reliability of the King James/Byzantine tradition. When we discuss the Alexandrian text of the New Testament, and compare it to the Byzantine text, the variants are so minor, and only represent 5% of the entire New Testament text, thus showing us that 95% of the text is in agreement; it becomes a matter of pride, that causes division in the church. We argue over 5% as opposed to agreeing on the 95%. Satan has done his job. He has successfully created serious division in the body of Christ. Only by pride can contention come.
I have learned to accept the Alexandrian manuscripts as historical proof of what we already possessed in the King James Version. The fact that the Alexandrian text is older, and yet is almost identical to the KJV text is proof enough for me that what I have in the KJV is trustworthy. It is what is known as corroborating evidence in the court of law. Empirical proof for the reliability of the extant text that brought us the KJV Bible. I have seen many souls come to sincere faith in Christ by hearing the word as it was preached from the NIV. All of the major doctrines of the faith are found in most of the modern translations (notice I said "most"). There are many modern versions of the Bible that are paraphrased, and therefore not true translations. I do not support or encourage the use of such, but the NASB, NIV, Holman CSB and the ESV are all good translations of the word. I have a copy of the Textus Receptus that I use daily when studying. I do not use the Nestle Aland text, but I will not reject it as heresy either. As I said earlier, it is as simple as finding an archeological discovery that supports the word.
As for the New King James Version, I do not understand why you are against it. It was translated from the same TR text that the KJV was translated, yet KJV onlyists reject it. Do you teach people that the KJV corrects the original languages? Do you support the use of the Webster's 1828 dictionary above that of a Strong's Concordance? These are evident problems of the absurdity that is propagated by this movement.
It is my sincere prayer that you would read this message and see the intention of peace, thus receiving the obvious truth revealed herein. A house divided against itself cannot stand. I pray that you would use the powerful voice God has given you and share this message. Stop spreading divisive rhetoric. If you wish to preach the Gospel, then do so. Use the KJV, for it is the most trustworthy English translation we have, but don't discourage others from faith in Christ that use other versions. Be an agent of peace. Blessed are the peacemakers, for they shall be called the children of God.
God's best to you sir,
in Jesus name,
Pastor Brett
Pastor Brett NKJV was translated using the Nestlés text, which as you're well aware is the work of Westcott and Hort - their interpretation of the Alexandrian and Sianaticus manuscripts. They were not guided by the Holy Spirit. They were satanic occultists. Unfortunately *all* modern translations use the Nestlés text as the basis.
Stick to the KJV.
Regards,
N. Ber.
Pastor Brett
I'm sorry sir but if you do not understand why KJVO's reject the NKJV, you have not looked as extensively into this topic as you claim.
Mr. Daniels,
I am well aware of the only reason why you reject the NKJV. The problem in your stand is not for the KJV, but against it. I am absolutely convinced that the KJV is the most trustworthy English translation, but not the only trustworthy tanslation. Your position is obviously indefensible when you compare all the manuscript evidence used when translating the scriptures. Even the KJV translators spoke about the need for many translations. When you read the Translators to the Reader, you can see for yourself that the KJV translators were for the use of many translations.
The New American Standard, and the ESV are the two that stand out to me as worthy to be called the word of God. They are both word for word, and not thought for thought translations like the NIV and most of the rest. The ESV and NASB are both word for word translations. They also relied heavily on the KJV/Byzantine manuscripts for their decisions on the more difficult portions of scripture.
KJV onlyists believe in the KJV. You worship the book, rather than the Lord who inspired it. Rather than study the original languages to understand the deeper truths hidden within the word, you would encourage the use of an 1828 Websters English Dictionary. I have been a part of a KJV only movement. Great preacher and wonderful man of God. He loves the Lord. So does my present Pastor. He loves Jesus and loves to preach the word. He is also a very accomplished Theologian and worthy of such a title. I am thankful to study the word under him. He uses an NIV only, but I still trust the pastors teaching because it always aligns with the word. Both KJV and NIV. I always bring my KJV to church.
I am not going to let pride destroy the work God has done and is doing in this church. There is only a 5% difference in the entire text of the New Testament when you compare the two different lines of manuscripts. The differences never change the meaning of the text! I will not be as harsh as you when discerning your studious nature. If you wish to continue preaching and teaching from the KJV, that is your choice. You have no God given place to condemn any one for choosing another version to read. The Latin Vulgate was the only Bible for over a thousand years. Was it any less the word of God because it was not the KJV?
God has given me a perfectly neutral position on the subject, thus giving me peace when I read other versions. My 1st choice is the KJV, but I have a wonderful library, comprised of Bibles, concordances and lexicons. I have my Hebrew texts and my Greek texts for reading, then I compare them to the English versions in my library. I used to be like you, condemning people for reading other versions, and driving people away from Christ, rather than encouraging them to simply seek the Lord Jesus. Stop condemning other versions and the people that read them. Just focus on Jesus, and preach the gospel.
Pastor Brett. I don't know about the other guy but not all "KJVO" people are like that. Are there those who want to divide churches and make divisions, sadly yes there are but those are two groups: immature brothers/sisters or nonbelievers. I got saved by using the NIV and I thank God for it, however what those bibles lack mainly is growth which is part of the reason why I switched. I know a lot plays into that like: how well the pastor is teaching, my attitude towards learning, etc. but your just being presumptuous and thinking that "KJV people divide churches all the time" that's not true. My pastor taught us that the verse in 1 John 5:7 "the heavenly wittiness" is a counterfeit verse that they added and my pastor learns this from other pastors who came from "Christian schools". Very person who made/maintains modern versions do not like the KJV or anything related to it. This is a fight that started long before you or me, by the way, look at Chicktracts videos more carefully. They aren't those church dividers as you proclaim.
Pastor Brett, yes perhaps only a 5% difference, but most of those directly deal with the divinity of Christ. Please go to codexsinaiticus.org and see for yourself up close what the bad joke that all modern versions are based on really looks like.