Is the King James Version the best version?
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 20 ต.ค. 2018
- Watch and listen to full episodes of Wretched Radio & TV for FREE: wretched.org
Follow Wretched:
Facebook: / wretchednetwork
Twitter: / wretchednetwork
Instagram: / wretched.network
Follow Todd Friel:
Twitter: / toddfriel
Help support quality Christian media!
wretched.org/donate
We cannot promise that your ongoing, tax-deductible monthly support will save polar bears and stop global warming (if there were such a thing). But we can promise that we will wisely use every penny you entrust to us to preach the Gospel to as many people as possible. Thank you for trusting us.
... The true issue is that post the King James, They, changed the premise from faith into works. From belief and unbelief into obedience and disobedience. (Which defines action via works and not in a simple belief). Whereas ALL of the work was preformed via the cross, through the sacrifice of the Son. If you choose to do additional works? That saying that's God sacrifices were NOT enough?
I am nowhere even close to KJVO, but everytime I hear the argument that older is better I become a bigger fan of the TR. Plus, there are great arguments for the TR over the CT that the CT crowd just dismiss.
Totally agree, “older is better” is a silly argument and shouldn't persuade you. Thankfully, it's just a strawman. Look at the “missing” verses like Acts 8:37 and the extended 1st John 5:7. Are those verses not found in modern bibles just because “older is better”, or are things a bit more complicated than that oversimplification?
The king James version is harder to read and being that God's word is Holy Spirit inspired,I believe God can use any translation to point one to Christ and also mature them. He can do all things
All the copies of the TR matched. A big problem with modern bible fans is how they could care less who Wescott and Hort were or what they said and did. It's no problem with them.
Whatever you like is. Cheap or expensive, hard cover - soft cover - leaver bound, etc. etc.
All the copies of the textus receptus matched. The copies of the Alexandrian text don't match. As usual, they've got it backwards. You'll read in the modern translations that such and such a passage isn't included because it's not found in the oldest copies of the text.
Over 5000 different agree with one another, if you haven’t forgotten.
How many agree with KJV's 1st John 5:7?
I'm seeing more posts like this expressing concerns over the KJV. In our generation of Christians, the main problem I see is professing Christians who don't read whatever Bible they have and rarely if ever bring it to church with them.
How correct are you? I don’t really care what some peoples bibles versions are, as long as it is a good faith translation. Dust that thing off and read it!
Well said Matthew!
Pastor asked everyone with a bible to hold it up. There was maybe 7 of us with bibles, he said "disappointing " with a sigh.
@@user-pb2gd7ft6w Thanks! I would like to see more church leaders work on getting Christians to just read their Bibles!
@@davewhite756 - Christians who read their KJV's and think it's the best thing in the world, are not the problem. Church leaders need to motivate their churches to read the Bible they have and bring it to church. We have a generation of Christians who do-not-read their Bibles.
Truth is: a lot of the "added verses" are simply cross-references and parallels across gospel accounts and between different books, and some already established church beliefs, such as the Trinity. The "added verses" are not necessarily wrong.
I John 5:7 debate live April 20th, Standing for Truth Ministries hosting at 8pm.
That's why we're hear.
There are some people in the King James only camp that are so extreme I question about the brothers and sisters that Todd refers to
ill hope god one day would just relase a podcast explainong what he is all about.
Todd your funny 😅
* you’re
My pastor isn't KJV-Only. He's more Textus Receptus-Only. He'd would rather see modern English Bibles based on the TR than the Critical Text, and he's open to taking the KJV and simply updating the language (as they're doing with the Geneva Bible right now). That being said, some of us at my church use other translations (one guy uses the NIV, I alternate between NKJV and NASB 1995), and it hasn't caused any issues. My pastor has the same viewpoint you have on the topic: agree to disagree. And that's as it should be.
Here's another problem, some people had this false notion that God will never communicate in modern language because he is almighty, and he only speaks and communicates in majestic language like KJV English. Absurd isn't it?
Research everything. Find out the truth takes dedication.
Right Christ said seek the truth goes for any subject
Better texts get copied into oblivion. These older texts surviving is a bad sign to me.
Well brother Todd, you'll have to answer the LORD as to what your final authority was. The God , who is perfect, has a perfect bible.
How do you know which is the perfect Bible? Is it the Coverdale, Bishops or King James. Which King James Version?
So basically we should be constantly asking our selves. "Did God really say?" while we read our bibles... " Sounds vaguely familiar. Why do we need so many modern English translations? How many times can a people assert and espouse the same "truth". The problem is they do not all same the same thing in harmony. This does nothing but cause doubt. Especially when versions like the ESV want so badly to terminate the last section of Mark and leave the Apostles in a fleeing fearful state. Why would God leave us hanging like that? Why are Christians so eager to hold closely bibles that attempt correct the majority text that came out of the Antioch region where the Christian church was first founded and choose to adhere to manuscripts that are based out of Catholicism in the form of discarded manuscripts recovered from a trash can and one that mysteriously reappeared in the Vatican library after missing for over 1000 years. One word comes to mind.. Kool-Aid.
Once one knows who Westcott and Hort were, what they believed about God’s Word and Jesus, what they practiced, and as a result how they came up with a hybrid New Testament Greek Text, one would want nothing to do with any bible that comes from them. From reading the NASB, the ESV and the CSB and finding out who these two heretics were, I abandoned all these hybrid bibles and I am reading now from the Majority Texts, the KJV. English is not my primary language and the KJV does not intimidate me at all. Pastors and ministers are not the only ones required to be theologians, ALL God’s children are called to be theologians. Reading the Word of God is great, but studying it is our duty. GO pick up a good bible dictionary and/or Vine’s Expository Dictionary and don’t stay in shallow waters, GO deeper. No excuse to say you don’t understand the KJV. God bless!
Do you want your Bible out of Antioch where the first Christians were called or do you want one from the Vatican and a Catholic monastery garbage can?
In my study I have learned that the name Textus Receptus just comes from a book put together in 1516 by a man named Desiderius Erasmus. He gathered manuscripts from different areas.
These manuscripts can be considered the backbone of bibles from 100 to 150 AD. The bible didn't come along when the english bible was translated. There has always been a bible. Bibles like the Peshitta (AD150) the Old Latin Vulgate (AD157) and others. The words of God were never lost. In away the manuscripts of the TR are the oldest we have going all the way back to the 1st century.
according historians & scholars Christ spoke Aramaic, remember? "Jesus cried with a loud voice, saying, Eloi, Eloi, lama sabachthani" which is interpreted, "My God, my God, why hast thou forsaken me"..--Mark 15:34. Therefore, it would be wise to translate from Aramaic to modern English. Many Christians traditionally use KJV, the problem it lacks clarity, confusing & even error most importantly we don't talk like that anymore. Romans-15; "For that which I do I allow not: for what I would, that do I not; but what I hate, that do I. 16; If then I do that which I would not, I consent unto the law that it is good".. see what i mean?
If Scholars & Authors translated directly from Aramaic to modern English, there would be so much simplicity & understanding. I've read a few Aramaic translations and believe me, the words are so refreshing & bring you a lot closer to God... i can't fully explain it but there's definitely a difference.
another problem: those onlyists I encountered even posits that if I don't understand the English in the KJV then I am not saved!
@@bpabustan yes some fools actually think if u don’t read from the “infallible” English KJV, you are not reading Gods word…, as if God ONLY approved the KJV, which has a lot of errors. So if KJV was written in 1611, all the Bible’s written before that year were wrong? Absolutely foolish
@@clightning9703 so sad, man. so sad.
You are full of it. I believe Paul talked about corruption in Scripture before the Cannon was ever formed. So older is not better. Alexandria was the hub of gnostic beliefs. Straight from the pit of Hell.
why becose the name trump is in there ... 1 Thessalonians 4:16-17King James Version. 16 For the Lord himself shall descend from heaven with a shout, with the voice of the archangel
, and with .. the trump .... of God: .... hahhahahahahahah
KJV is messed up. Jonah 4:11
The King James version is THE HOLY BIBLE for all English speaking people.
It's not even how we speak anymore.
Did you know the KJV bible is a revision of the bishop bible? And there is indeed a copyright on it. It's an old version of one but it's there
@@lw6138no cap, I fittin to cop a fresh fit
Wrong.
@@bryanbulmer6716no it's not. They had few translations for reference.
So God let’s Mistakes happen don’t think so KJV is the only true bible
Not true , it's the worst , it's theologically compromised . Don't you see Satan is the great deceiver deceiving like 30% of the religious world into believing the worst bible is the best unbelievable fascinating . Two verse KJV says Jacobs days were few and evil ridiculous it should be few and difficult , also , love of money is the root of all kinds of evil not all evil .
KJV IS THE BEST AND NIV IS JESUIT BIBLE
@@Evangelistfra Your deceived
@@biblebill6206 send me Mathew 17:21 from NIV, send me Mathew 24:15 from NIV and then from KJV