Why the King James Bible
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 7 ก.ย. 2024
- The teaching of Bible versions is one of the most misunderstood doctrines. Learn the necessary steps to understanding how we got our Bible.
Find the outline here :
graceambassador...
Grace Ambassadors Bible Fellowship - Sunday, June 5, 2016
![Megan Thee Stallion - Neva Play (feat. RM) [Official Video]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/TpYTyAaTRts/mqdefault.jpg)
I AM 36 YEARS OLD AND DIDN'T KNOW HOW TO READ UNTIL I WAS 30 AND I LEARNED READING THE KJV BIBLE
WOW!
Amen!
Pre-revolutionary war colonial children were taught to read from the KJV. As one reads from Genesis moving forward, vocabulary becomes more complex. Prisoners who have reading difficulties are sometimes tested in relation to reading levels. Some come up to college level.
This is awesome!
The king JAMES NEVER says to worship on Sunday people
This guy gets it.
I have found that God gives me what I need WHEN I need it. I read daily and I have run into verses that I've read before but I JUST understood. Amazing word.
It blows my mind how two translations can say completely different things on the exact same topic yet people still not care. Only one can be the word. Only one is truth.
The king james Bible took 7 yrs to make. And 7 means complete and perfect.
@@davidinchcliff4560 yep, thats why its the only translation I read
@fillup901 it is also the only one that doesn't have a copyright therefore anyone can print it for free
@@davidinchcliff4560 Google is not allowing me to post my recent reply to your comment. not sure why. I just wanted to let you know i didnt know that and thanks for sharing. The KJB is also ful lof divine numerical equations, just search jaw dropping 666 discovery king james bible and the video by Truth is Christ channel will show up.
@@davidinchcliff4560 The KJV actually predates the concept of copyright by nearly a century (copyright started with the Statute of Anne in 1710). In the United Kingdom, the King James Bible can be printed only by the King’s Printer (Cambridge University Press), Cambridge University Press in their capacity as a University Press, and Oxford University Press. In Scotland, the rights are delegated to the Scottish Bible Board.
Had it been published after 1710, it would’ve been copyrighted for a while but now would be in the public domain. There are others that are in the public domain that anyone can print and distribute. Such as the Revised Version, American Standard, Word English Bible, Darby Bible, Young’s Literal Translation, among others.
What I really like about Justin is how he asks everyone at the end of the sermon if they understood and are there any questions...don't know any other preacher that does that .
R Gray True
Amen
Preservation is such a rare doctrine, it is hard to find any teaching on it.
I’m only 15 minutes in and I like this already. You’re wise to bring this back to foundational issues, the Spirit speaking to mankind and God preserving His Word.
His word has always been preserved. He never said he'd preserve a specific translation of those words.
Yes! God has in deed preserved His Word... but this Word is obviously not King James! It is His Word preserved by Hebrew Rabbis and Scholars in The Masoretic Text of Old Testament, and The scrolls written by the Apostles and preserved by Christ"s disciples in Antioch and then Constantinople, and then Geneva, Switzerland which was the birthplace of The Geneva Bible, the True Bible of The Reformation!
The sermon was indeed good and edifying. Thank you and God bless!
Came across this video when driving my son to school. Had to finish it when I got home. Great stuff!
This guy is RIGHT ON!
I was saved using the NIV. I am now a KJV only but not because I believe it is magic.
The KJV is, simply, the most accurate Scripture.
Ptr Robert Breaker, Ptr Gene Kim, Ptr Peter Ruckman, Ptr Charles Lawson and this channel is my favorite channel. Telling the truth in the Bible!
Amen !!
@@samlawrence2695 nye 😂. Good morning.
The men you mention do NOT rightly divide God's word. I would pick different men to listen to if I were you. Try, David Reed and Dave O'Steen.
@@dkgrace6743 ohh. Did you watch their videos?
@@Roberto-un4tk If you are talking about the men you mentioned, I have seen enough of them to know they don't rightly divide God's word and teach things that are simply not biblically true and accurate. Be careful with who you watch and believe. Always go to God's word rightly divided to get the proper interpretation of God's word.
Ruckman was a very strict Baptist. If you know anything about the Baptist teachings you will know they do not rightly divide the scriptures. I know this for a fact b/c I was in a Baptist church for 15 yrs. No one person has it all correct. But why go to those we know have most of it wrong.
One of the best defense of kvj I've heard. It is really disheartening to hear your own teacher tell you it doesn't matter what version you read. But, they don't think anything matters. Including sin.
Jerimiah 6:16 Thus saith the LORD, Stand ye in the ways, and see, and ask for the old paths, where is the good way, and walk therein, and ye shall find rest for your souls. But they said, We will not walk therein.
Thank you JJ yet again. Bless you.
I've noticed certain verses comes alive to me ! Illuminated! As from a child knowing the scriptures what what u taught ! I was not quite understand what that really meant . Now you explained it . I now understand how come certain verses come alive ! Thank u so much ❤️
Aside from inspiration and doctrine, I love the archaic language of the KJB.
The beautiful archaic words are a hook that make it easier to recall rather than contemporary common terminology.
When I was young I so easily engrafted the 31 chapters of Proverbs in about 6 months.
I've been reading it with great enjoyment for over 40 years.
What inspiration? The KJV is nothing more than an imperfect uninspired translation. Like all translations. As for doctrine no doctrine is changed in modern translations none at all. Despite what the KJV only cult say, the KJV is not the standard.
What inspiration? The KJV is nothing more than an imperfect uninspired translation. Like all translations. As for doctrine no doctrine is changed in modern translations none at all. Despite what the KJV only cult say, the KJV is not the standard.
@@samlawrence2695 thou sayest...
God requires the things that are past, says the Bible, and this includes the "archaic" language. The thee and thou identifies God as one Person, or one Spirit if you will.
@@justinhemion6279 not thou but I
"Faith comes by hearing and hearing by the Word of God." We need to make sure we have the TRUE Word of God preserved over the generations. Also the bible is spiritually discerned. You must have your eyes opened by the Holy Spirit. This attack is Satan's same tactic: "Did God really say?"
This is awesome! Thank you.
Confusion is what the modern versions do. Also bring doubt.
Your comment is incompetent, the revised bishops bible (kjv) included the letter to the reader and the revisers/translators refute kjv onlyism, ABSOLUTELY. My 1611 disagrees with modern kjv, the 1611 is defended, but nearly no onlyist has a 1611 or the letter to the reader, more than 8400 marginal and reference notes concerning the ECLECTIC TEXT OF ERASMUS, STEPHANUS, and BEZA, not from the TR, which term was not even coined until 1633 by the Elzevir brothers.
The revised bishops bible (kjv) was the Catholic pew bible created by Catholics and read from the pews by Catholics.
@@Rightlydividing-wx1xb yes that is why i hold to the 1611 first edition not the revisions. I am not a so called KJV onlyist. I just want what those so called modern versions claim is their source for updates. Sorry but being in "Christianity" for more than 40 plus years using all kinds of bibles and learning the truth...i think it is important to have THE only bible NOT copyrighted and that modern churches hate and Satanists want gone. They like the modern versions. No sir. I want translation not man's copyrighted "versions". Yes they even changed the KJV. therefore i am not KJV only. I am true holy bible only. give me the one that the most faith came and the most martyrs produced because they translated it and/or read it. See who you must go to if you use too many copyrighted verses from modern bibles.
@@henrylaurel4476 tell me why Satanists, modern churches, and Rome hate the Av1611? Tell me why they claim to base their bibles on the AKJV but have actually changed it. Look at the documentaries: A Lamp in the Dark, Tares Among the Wheat, and A Bridge to Babylon to get the history of the Bible and what happened to it. How they are trying to create a one world bible. Ecumenical. When you read the true Word of God you will have a filling like never before. Real growth not confusion or stagnation. Modern versions brought division and shed a whole lot of doubt on the authority and inerrancy of God's Word. They are copyrighted in which the AV1611 is not. See who is behind the modern bibles...
@@Rightlydividing-wx1xb the AV1611 took 47 scholars and several years of testing to TRANSLATE God's Word. Of course there were those who wanted to get rid of it but couldn't so they changed it ever so slightly. You have been lied to. Follow the trail and see there are only two kinds of bibles: one comes from Antioch the AV1611 all others come from Alexandria Egypt and the Vatican. Is there any wonder why the true AV1611 has been hidden, King James attacked, and even a group called kjv onlyists created? They want to lie and cast as much doubt as they can on the "every jot and tittle" bible. They hate it so much.
AMEN 😇 hopeseeker97
Loved, loved, loved the hymn. Thanks Justin for the message and thank You God for Your Word preserved. :)
Just ordered a new KJV after nearly 25 years on the mission field in Asia. Probably the last this side of glory or until the Lord returns (hopefully) - but I am super excited to get in in a few days. This was a very informative video. I have used ESV, NKJV, and others for years, but I always return to the KJV and use it mostly these days as my only one - thanks
Fantastic teaching! 100%
God bless you brother. All glory to God. Love you.💝💝💝💝💝💝💝Greetings from India.
If Jesus and the apostles read it, it's the one I will always read.
Of course they did not read the N.T. because it was not in book or manuscript form yet. But the word did begin to be published in the first century, as says the Book of Acts.
@@ralphowen3367they did read the NT actually cause they knew it was scripture and referred to it as so
@@ntkmw8058 As a completed manuscript, I do not think the first apostles had the entire N.T. until about 97 A.D.., but individual epistles were in circulation many years earlier.
1 Peter 1:22-25 KJV(Seeing ye have purified your souls in obeying the truth through the Spirit unto unfeigned love of the brethren, love one another with a pure heart fervently: Being born again, not of corruptible seed, but of incorruptible, by the word of God, which liveth and abideth for ever. For all flesh as grass, and all the glory of man as the flower of grass. The grass withereth, and the flower thereof falleth away: But the word of the Lord endureth for ever. And this is the word which by the gospel is preached unto you.).
GOD SPEAKS THROUGH HIS WORD , HALLELUJAH
Thank you I learned a lot from you Brotherr
This is one of the most clearly taught and well-spoken lectures I’ve seen regarding this vital issue. Praise God, and thank you for your work, brother.
Thanks brother ❤️ for the teaching
I had in Eastern Orthodox 2 Eastern Orthodox Catholic priests tell me to my face do not read the Bible only follow the tradition of their Church one of them told me that King James changed Jacob's name from Jacob to James and said that's why the King James Bible is not the word of God because according to him there's no such thing as the word of God which is a heresy but putting that aside so I did a simple hour-and-a-half research and found out that the word Jacob in Greek has 7 different names at the word Jacob goes by one of them is James so the Catholic priests lied straight to my face telling me that the King James Bible is lying because they change the name of Jacob to James when in reality the name Jacob can be translated in 7 different names it doesn't need to be Jacob in the Greek not only that when a church says to your face that the word of God doesn't exist and that there's no such thing as the word of God that we should only follow the traditions of their Church and their history only at that point you should take the Bible that they gave you throw it at their face and pick up a King James Bible and never go back to that cult again
great teaching it helps me a lot !! God bless !
Thank you for this lesson! I love it!
EXACTLY!!! Amen!!!
kjv is the true word of God✝️🙏🔥👑⚡️
Great job brother!!!
Amen brother thank you for this!!!
Praise God 😇 for your teaching
8:00 "This will not be an issue for people who do not care what is in the bible" EXACTLY!
Thank you ! This helps me a lot .
Genesis 1:1 is translated in KJV as "In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth.", one "heaven", singular. In NKJV it is "In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth.", "heavens", plural. In the original Hebrew scripture השמים, the word for the sky, the heaven is plural form. Therefore, I can only wonder how many more verses are not properly translated in KJV, and how can anyone claim that the KJV is the best or most accurate translation?
1: When I ride my bike, I like when the winds flow through my hair
2: When I ride my bike, I like when wind flows through my hair
No difference in plural or singular. Weak attack
The Vatican has had their dirty hands on all the English translations except the KJV. So it is a simple choice. You have the KJV bible or a Vatican bible to choose from.
***** Erasmus may have been catholic but his translating the new testament was against the RCC. He was a reformer at heart and his work was not accepted by the RCC. In fact, it was forbidden for a catholic to read the Erasmus new testament in fear of committing a mortal sin. Erasmus rejected the catholic bible, the Latin vulgate. Erasmus had enough sense to reject the false practices of the RCC.
halfstep67 ...and Geneva Bible, Tyndale. Those are solid. But agree with you regarding the new translations (ie mid-19th century until now)!
Covenant Caswell if you’re referring to Erasmus, he simply recognized the “received” text which had been preserved (as God promised) miraculously through the Waldenses, Byzantine Christians and Northern Scotts and others...
Manuscripts of the Textus Receptus come from Antioch, Syria...home of the first Christians with Apostle Paul. The other corrupted manuscripts used by the RCC come from Alexandria, Egypt.
Let me destroy your KJVO delusion with one verse: Revelation 16,5: "And I heard the angel of the waters say, Thou art righteous, O Lord, which art, and wast, and shalt be, because thou hast judged thus."
There's not a single Greek manuscript reading "and shalt be" (kai o esomenos). "O osios" (o Holy one) is the only correct reading here.
Amen!
This is awesome! I have been looking for this lecture for many years - why did it take me so long to find it???
Things that are different are not the same.
King James wanted to go down in history. He had political ambitions. The Dead Sea scrolls resemble more the newer translations. None of the translations are perfect. I was recently looking into the misprint in 1 Samuel that forgot to add Goliaths “brother”. Itv was later added through 1 Chronicles where the account was worded correctly.
Ahh so God has no regard for English speaking people or basically anyone who doesn’t speak Greek or Hebrew and is some kind of far away deist. Do you realize how abhorrent your view is to God? This is abhorrent to us, so imagine how much more it is to God. Please repent my friend this is truly disgusting
Loving it!!!
KJV helps with reading The Bard also.
Any notes for this lesson? Awesome presentation. Thank you.
hopeseeker97: at the "show More" is a link to the handout. Just below the video.
Jesus says That the word would be preserved. He is talking about the law. So the law was perseved until when? Until Paul received the revelation of grace apart from the law. May I suggest you are taking that verse out of its contact in order prove your presupposition.
I believe the KJV Bible is the Pure Word of God ❤ it’s the only Bible that hasn’t changed for over 200 years. All other versions have changed & many with verses missing. Lastly, God can preserve his word regardless of what man or devil may think. 💞
Think again! The KJV is said to be “the most poorly edited volume in all literature”. It’s had 10,000 changes, 3 major revisions (10 in total), and even evangelist scholars say that “it is filled with overzealous inventions”.
It was not the first Authorised Bible, and is based on the Bishops Bible which in turn was based on the Great Bible which is in turn based on the Tyndale.
The two most accurate Bibles, amazingly perhaps, are the Catholic NAB and the JW’s NWT… see the thorough reviews in “Truth in Translation” by University Press.
Thank you !!!
Psalm 68:11 The Lord gave the word: Great was the company of those that published it.
Oh wow! I thought that hymn was "I come to the Garden Alone"...
bro Justin, excellent teaching, bless u for taking up this very important assignment, and teaching yr congregation abt this topic, but my question is to all the other ministers of the gospel, is this an important topic or not, u need to ask your selves this question, for those who do,well done, in my congregation i have not heard this topic for the last 26 years, sad, i stumbled upon this very important topic, by chance on U TUBE, the big question is WHY will people research this topic if no one ever encouraged them to do so, especially from the pulpit, and they were not warned abt these two scoundrels called westcott & hort, and many others , such as a lesbian sitting on the translation team, any God bless u bro for yr discernment.
@36:50 Amen! Thank you pastor!
The definition of inspiration is: "the drawing in of breath."
The words for Holy Spirit in Hebrew are Ruach HaKodesh
Ruach = breath/spirit
HaKodesh = Holy
.... so to be inspired by God is to draw in Ruach HaKodesh. Awesome yah?
Does anyone know if there is an updated version of this? The KJB, NASB 1995, NASB 2020 & the fairly new LSB endorsed by John MacArthur have the same number of Chapters and verses in the last chapter of Mark. Also Luke 24:51 ”And it came to pass, while he blessed them, he was parted from them, and carried up into heaven.“ I can't find a single Bible translation this is missing from. I realize this video is 7 years old but it seems to have inaccuracies that needlessly disparage other Christians. I love the eloquent language of the King James Bible but I also use the NASB 1977 and the LSB. Can anyone tell me of any other discrepancies?
It is imperative that we have the true word of God, this matters for all doctrine and biblical truth.
God's Word tells us not to add to or diminish aught from His word and gives some examples too.
(Deu 4:2, Deu 12:32, Deu 17:11, Ezr 6:11, Psa 56:5, Psa 119:126, Pro 30:6, Jer 23:36, Jer 26:2, Mat 15:1-9, Mar 7:1-13, Rom 1:25 2, Co 2:17, 2Co 4:2, 2Pe 1:20, 2Pe 1:21, 2Pe 3:16, Rev 22:18-19)
Psa 12:6 The words of the LORD are pure words: as silver tried in a furnace of earth, purified seven times.
Psa 12:7 Thou shalt keep them, O LORD, thou shalt preserve them from this generation for ever.
God has said that He would preserve His words forever.
Psa 11:3 If the foundations be destroyed, what can the righteous do?
What is more important than a sure foundation of the Word of God?
2Ti 3:16 All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness:
2Ti 3:17 That the man of God may be perfect, throughly furnished unto all good works.
When you have bibles that say completely different things, The Holy Ghost did not do that, either the words are inspired or man-made. when one text has The Blood and others do not that is a major thing and The Holy Ghost did not inspire one to have the Blood and others to not have the Blood.
The modernists are trying to tell us that there are no doctrines that are affected between the KJV and their perversions.
Colossians 1:14 many of the modern perversion remove the blood from Col 1:14, and those that have it are not being true to the base text they are based on, if it ain't in their base text then why would they add it in? only for the purpose of deception would they be unfaithful to their own perverted texts.
(Accurate New Testament+) 1:14 inG1722 whomG3739 [We] haveG2192 theG3588 redemptionG629 theG3588 forgivenessG859 [of] theG3588 offensesG266
(English Standard Version) 1:14 in whom we have redemption, the forgiveness of sins.
(Holman Christian Standard Bible) 1:14 in whom we have redemption, the forgiveness of sins.
(King James Version) 1:14 In whom we have redemption through his blood, even the forgiveness of sins:
(King James Version+) 1:14 InG1722 whomG3739 we haveG2192 redemptionG629 throughG1223 hisG846 blood,G129 even theG3588 forgivenessG859 of sins:G266
(New American Standard Bible) 1:14 in whom we have redemption, the forgiveness of sins.
(New International Reader's Version) 1:14 Because of what the Son has done, we have been set free. Because of him, all of our sins have been forgiven. Christ Is Far Above Everything.
(New International Version) 1:14 in whom we have redemption, the forgiveness of sins. The Supremacy of Christ.
(New King James Version) 1:14 in whom we have redemption through His blood, the forgiveness of sins.
(New Living Translation) 1:14 God has purchased our freedom with his blood and has forgiven all our sins.
(The Message) the Son who got us out of the pit we were in, got rid of the sins we were doomed to keep repeating.
(The Common English Bible) He set us free through the Son and forgave our sins.
(The Modern English Version) In whom we have redemption through his blood, even the forgiveness of sins:
(The Passion Translation) For in the Son all our sins are canceled and we have the release of redemption through his very blood.
You are right we should not add to God's word. One of the reasons I do not read the KJV. Besides the archaic English where so many words have changed meaning making it inaccurate. It also has many added uninspired verses, added by uninspired scribes. Also no scripture supports the unbilical indefensible KJV only heresy. If it is a preferred choice, that is different. But this onlyism nonsense is laughable. Or would be if was not one of Satan's most subtle deceptions.
@@Sam-tk6us
I have looked at some of the arguments, and for me it boils down to the manuscripts used for translation.
The Textus Receptus
The alexandrines texts, codex vaticanus, codex Sinaiticus, codex alexandrous, papyrus 75, and some others.
One set is inspired and the other has been altered significantly and why they match in places, and yet are so different in others, I am of the opinion that it is the alexandrines texts that have been altered by scribes of about the 7th century according to the Paleographer John Dean Burgon, so I hold that the Textus Receptus are the inspired manuscripts and also because they agree with each other in 90% of the texts, while vaticanus and Sinaiticus differ greatly between themselves, in the 4 gospels alone they differ over 3,000 times, that is clear evidence to me of scribal editing.
I was born in 59, so I grew up in the 70s in the Bay Area of California, I did the long hair, and hung out with the wrong crown, raised in one of the most liberal states in the union, if anyone was going to have a problem with the archaic language of the KJV it should have been me according to my background, but I love the KJV and the archaic language is not a problem for me.
We make the archaic language a problem only if we want to, my parents told me over and over again that I could do anything I wanted to or set my mind to do, yes within limits of course, so I have no problem reading the KJV, and believing it to be the best bible for English speaking people, I have known people who go to the Shakespearian festivals and loved it, and yet that is the old Elizabethan language in use, and some of our best beloved Hymns use that language,
How Great Thou Art, Nearer my God to thee, among others, so that language is still pretty well entrenched, as are certain sayings that come from the KJV also known as bible sayings. I just looked up a list 85 of them that read from the KJV.
KJV Bible Sayings still commonly used today
A law unto themselves
A man after his own heart
A stumbling block
A thief in the night
A thorn in the flesh
All these things must come to pass
All things to all men
And the word was made flesh
At their wit's end
Be fruitful and multiply
Born again
Bottomless pit
By their fruits ye shall know them
Charity shall cover the multitude of sins
Crumbs which fall from ... table
Death, where is thy sting
Den of thieves
Dreamer of dreams
Eat, drink and be merry
Eye for an eye
Fallen from grace
Fatted calf
Fell by the way side
Fell flat on his face
Fell on stony ground
Fight the good fight
From strength to strength
Get thee behind me
Give up the ghost
God forbid
Holier than thou
Honour thy father and mother
How are the mighty fallen
In the twinkling of an eye
Land of Nod
Led as a sheep to the slaughter
Left hand know what thy right hand doeth
Let my people go
Let there be light
Love thy neighbour as thyself
Milk and honey
Money is the root of all evil
My brother's keeper
My name is legion
New wine into old bottles
No room for them in the inn
Out of the mouths of babes
Physician, heal thyself
Put the words in her mouth
Scapegoat
Seek and ye shall find
Set thine house in order
Sheep's clothing
Suffer fools gladly
Take root
The blind lead the blind
The last shall be first
The leopard [change] his spots
The lost sheep
The powers that be
The signs of the times
The skin of my teeth
The spirit indeed is willing, but the flesh is weak
They know not what they do
Thou shalt not bear false witness
To give than to receive
Turn to him the other [cheek]
Turned the world upside down
Two are better than one
Two-edged sword
Vengeance is mine
Wandering stars
White as snow
Woe is me
@@dennishagans6339 A lot of hot air that says absolutely nothing. But a circular reasoning to try and justify the KJV only heresy. This myth about the Alexandrian text is "corrupt" has been proven to be a completely false. Just another deception and outrageous lie from the KJV only cult. The Textus Receiptus from which the KJV was translated from.. Are later manuscripts dedicated to the Pope with many added uninspired verses. Also of course the KJV translators also relied heavily on the Latin Vulgate. Showing the Catholic influence on the KJV. Why should I read some archaic imperfect uninspired translation, where so many words have changed meaning making the KJV even more inaccurate!? When God has blessed us with more accurate translations in English we can understand? You do know that the KJV translators knew their work was not perfect. Why does the KJV only cult think they know better? The gospel is about Christ and him crucified not some archaic trans of scripture called the KJV. Also it was in Alexandria where the deity of Christ and the doctrine of trinity was defended. It was Antioch where the deity of Christ was denied. So much for the KJV only deceivers about the Alexandrian manuscripts. Manuscripts that are not corrupted by all the added uninspired verses that are in the KJV
PSALM 119:140 ; 119:160 PSALM 12:6-7 CORRUPTION COMES IN 3 FORMS 1 CHANGING OF THE READING 2 OMISSION OF PART OF THE VERSE
3 OMISSION OF ALL THE VERSE
2 COR 11:3 PSALM 118:8
I BELIEVE THAT THE KJV 1611 AUTHORISED IS THE PERFECT INSPIRED WORD OF GOD
Omission of part or All is easy to understand - Pls what do you mean EXTRA by 'Changing the Reading' ? - If possible an example would be helpful to understanding your three forms of corruption.
There are no perfect translations, the 1611 version was unreadable and included the Apocryphal books. You call that perfect?
@@tyronehelm4778 the 1611 King James Bible was in Gothic text which was difficult for the English speaking people to read. To the 1611 type was changed so its more readable.
U question the 1611 King James Bible? The words of God 😮??
@@debbyantoine My point was if it was a so called perfect translation by God, then there wouldn't be a need for correction and eliminating the Apocryphal books. What some folks don't realize is that their using 1769 edition and not 1611. The kvj also isn't the only bible you can read to get the gospel message for the body of Christ mentioned in 1 cor.15 1-4.
@@tyronehelm4778 accept there are lots of differences between 2 of the Bibles.
No letter J in the 1611 King James Bible. Yet there is in the 1769 Edition. Which changes the meaning of the verses.
Acts 1:16 KJV(Men brethren, this scripture must needs have been fulfilled, which the Holy Ghost by the mouth of David spake before concerning Judas, which was guide to them that took Jesus.).
Where did you get the understanding that making Jesus Lord of your life is sound doctrine?
Such a great sermon!
I believe Paul wrote 14 Epistles, as In both of my KJB's have Paul as the author to the Hebrews. He makes this clear in the end where he mentioned Timothy. Correct me if I am wrong? God bless!
I have realized now that no author is mentioned in Hebrews and Paul always used his name, either this was Paul's first epistle and didn't use his name in the beginning because Paul was not preaching the same gospel and he would be acursed if he wrote Hebrews after his other epistles which is not likely. A name is not given so its safe to assume it was not needed. God bless
Hebrews is formally anonymous in and of itself and philological analysis strongly argues that it was not written by Paul.
The Greek is way too polished when we compare it to any of the Pauline letters, whether written in committee or by Paul alone. Hebrews' style is better than any of the "collaboration" letters (note that many, like Romans, clearly announce Paul and at least one coauthor). Moreover, Hebrews far exceeds those letters I believe to be genuinely Pauline and written only by him, the so-called Pastoral Epistles (1 & 2 Timothy and Titus). Some may argue that Paul was under stress and duress when writing the Pastorals, meaning his style suffered, but the Pastorals have much more in common stylistically with, say, Romans and Galatians, than with Hebrews. Also, when was Paul not under stress and duress during his ministry?
Of any NT author, Luke would be the likeliest candidate (and this was argued for quite vociferously in the late 19th century) because his command of the language and style is very strong. We can compare Luke-Acts with Hebrews and see strong overlapping that signals a highly-educated and polished author that we don't see with the Pauline corpus.
Whoever wrote Hebrews knew Paul's arguments quite well (again, Luke is a strong NT candidate because he's a known companion of Paul). A disciple of Paul, who did not lie by claiming Paul's name and authority, is responsible.
@@krismikewill Thanks for your well put response, I now believe it was Luke, or John Mark. But yes Luke most likely as he also journeyed with Paul often, and also The Holy Spirit did not feel the need to put a name, yet the doctrine is not Pauline. Therefore let Gods word say what it says rather than the publishers putting which name. Also Paul giving his salutation and name in every epistle is further proof Paul did not write Hebrews.
@@BrotherRyan Thanks for the interaction, Ryan. I try to engage fairly, accurately, and without too much jargon.
John Mark has traditionally been identified with Mark the Evangelist, the credited author of the Gospel of Mark. Like Hebrews, the Gospel of Mark is formally anonymous.
While the Gospel of Luke admits to using sources in its production, and it is practically undeniable that the Gospel of Mark is one, I am not in favor of crediting the author of the Gospel of Mark with the production of Hebrews.
For various reasons, I promote an early date for the Gospel of Mark. I also promote a near contemporary date for Hebrews with the Gospel of Mark. I can admit that an author can grow over time, as comparisons of my beginning graduate work in 2002 vs. today would expose, but my presuppositions regarding near contemporaneous compositions rules out the same author for Hebrews and the Gospel of Mark. The idea that the differing genres (theological biography vs. a letter) can mask the style of an author does not hold since Luke-Acts "matches better."
The question, "Does the author matter," may not matter here. It is highly important regarding the Pastorals (if Paul is not the author, they are "pious forgeries" that the Spirit did not stop and the canon of Scripture contains lies), but diminishes for those anonymous NT books. I would be shocked to find Mark as that author, but I believe that a Jewish stone mason of 1st century Palestine is God, so I can be convinced 😊.
@@krismikewill Amen, I didnt mean that it doesnt matter to the degree that we should not use context to try to figure out who wrote it, just as we know the New Testament is not in the beginning of Matthew technically but when Jesus died thats when the New Testament could begin. It does not mean the KJV is wrong, but yes I agree it makes a lot more sense that Luke would be the author, I can tell you did more research than me on this topic. I am just thankful to come to right division, the gospel of the grace of God, and the revelation of the mysteries are now much more clear. Thanks for your maturity and keep on coming to the knowledge of the truth on the sound doctrine!
Circular reasoning is broken by all the fulfilled prophecies of the Bible.
From the above we know the Bible is true, now all we need to green is which one.
HA! I know God will have it all worked out and that Christ is
the Word, but I fear missing
occasion to read Scripture King James in particular.
BTW, does anyone know of any reference which indicates the language we will speak in Eternity?
Not exactly a direct reference, but in Revelation it talks about the tree of life to heal the nations (Rev. 22:2) so, my thoughts are yes we will speak whatever our native language is through all eternity with our Lord, we will be able to understand other nations in their languages somehow. :-)
Isaiah 9:6 says that the child (Jesus) will be called the everlasting Father. I assume that you believe the Father here in Isaiah is a different Father in 1 John 5:7 which in fact is a verse about Jesus being the Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost.
Galatians 4:7
And because ye are sons, God hath sent forth the Spirit of his Son into your hearts, crying, Abba Father.
Ephesians 4:6
One God and Father of all, who is above all, and through all, and in you all.
2 Corinthians 3:17
Now the Lord is that Spirit: and where the Spirit of the Lord is, there is liberty.
Since Jesus is the Lord, he obviously is the Spirit, the Holy Spirit.
According to your trinity doctrine. The Father is first, the Son is 2nd, and the Holy Ghost is 3rd. If that were true Jesus can't claim to be the Alpha and Omega.
Because according to the way you are teaching about the KJV in this video you have clearly said the Holy Ghost is the Alpha and Omega. The beginning and the ending of God's word. This obviously is a complete contradiction to what Rev. 1:8, 11, & 22:13- Jesus says he is the first and the last.
Rev.21:3
... Behold, the tabernacle of God is with men, and he will dwell with them...
the tabernacle of God- the Word- became flesh called the Son- Jesus the name of the Father, the Son, and Holy Ghost in him all the fullness dwell.
Rev. 21:22
And I saw no temple therein:
for the Lord God Almighty and the Lamb are the temple of it.
It's obvious that the tabernacle and temple of God is the body of God called the Word. This is where the soul of God called the Father and the spirit of God called the Holy Ghost dwells.
How many times has the KJV been changed from it's original? How many mistakes have been corrected since the very first KJV? Which one of those are the one and only preserved words of God? You do er! There are good reasons for revisions, new information from older manuscripts would naturally infer more accurate Words of God. Essentially they all have the same meaning. No major change in meaning, but as you speak of, more and better illumination!
@49:06 Hallelujah! With what I understand, and have read so far as of now, I believe Jesus is speaking as the Father in this verse. Isn’t it written that the Father gives all judgment to the Son? And Jesus Christ, the Son of God, is revealed to be the Word of God?… :•)
Indeed, I was saved through using the demonic NIV,
Turn you at my reproof: behold,
I will pour out my spirit unto you,
I will make known my words unto you.
Proverbs 1:23 (Authorized King James Bible)
I think God uses all versions to his own advantage.. he can draw us to himself with any version, like the niv is what I started out reading, but now he’s made it known to me that it makes him happy when I read kjv, so how could i go back to the niv now that I know this? I can’t.
Compare Isaiah 14:12 and Revelation 22:16 in both the King James Version and the New International Version. Can they both be correct ? This is just ONE example of the difference in WORDS between the versions. Why is it that the KJV is public domain and ALL other versions are copyrighted ? Did God almighty need man to come behind him to "improve/make the words more easy to understand?" I do NOT think that is the case. Without faith it is impossible to please God.
💗🙏💗
@@samlawrence2695 And you are very wrong on the accusation of being to to blasphemy of the Holy Spirit.
Marks account actually tells you what blaspheming the Spirit is.
@@samlawrence2695 Sam I agree.
I diagree with the notion that KJV-only folks blaspheme the Holy Spirit by for example calling the the niv "satanic". After all all bibles where translated by humans and not the Holy Spirit or angels.
But as I said the KJV only folks have no good argument against the NKJV for example.
It uses the very same texts as were used to translate the KJV.
It's interesting to see how weak and pathetic their arguments against the NKJV are.
They have a point about the textual basis- I prefer the byzantine received text over the alexandrian critical text - however that's about it.
God bless you
@@konstantinallinforchrist9867 Not wrong at all, nothing sataniic about the solid brilliant NIV. God is using it and blessing it to bring many to Christ. How can Satan cast out Satan? That is blasphemy. Just like the blasphemous idolatrous cult called KJV onlyism.
Scripture is the axiom of Christianity.
@ 11 10 ...The ONLY thing you need to be saved is to have faith ... For by grace are ye saved through faith; and that not of yourselves: [it is] the gift of God: Ephesians 2 8 KJV
Faith in what?
1st Corinthians 15 verses1-4
Question where came from Sunday worship ?
The KJV came out of a particular time and place and politics. It's a standard for a small percentage of Christians, but not the standard for likely over 90% of Christians. It's a fine English text but not the most accurate translation.
Isaiah 34:16 "Seek Ye out of the book of the Lord and read..Deuteronomy 32:3 "I will publish the Name of the Lord" Psalm 44:4 God's signature as author of the Bible...King ...Jacob....Jacob means James=King James
what books could I use outside of the KJV to help me understand textual criticism. I am KJV only and I attend a Christian College where they are trying to teach me that I don't have the perfect word of God. other books on the topic will be appreciated. thank you
@@henrylaurel4476 WOW, how is David Daniels a cultist? David attended seminary and would be a great help!!
Look up the underground christian network , jason Zelda, excellent details,but for some downloads and details go to BIBLE VERSIONS ,WHAT THE DIFFERENCE, BEYOND THE FUNDERMENTALS , CHICK TRACK, good material too, Excellent reading material, be blessed
There are people that set a goal to read the whole Bible in a year. But that is not studying, and there are people that focus on Hebrew and Greek, once again they are missing the mark. Remember the Bible was in spired by God, therefore we can't read it like other books. We must use principles laid out in the word of God. Such as Isa. 28:8-12, 1cor. 13:1 and 1cor. 2:12-. Remember the Fondation is God is the same, and Jesus is to. Hebrew. 13:8 therefore there will be consistency in old and new testament. Pick a subject in the Bible and read every verse on the given subject. Let's pick death, therefore every word that has to do with it, read it. Death, die, dying grave and so on. Try the sabbath
Charles L Surrett have two good books on the topic, Which Greek Text, and Certainty of the Words.
When you log onto youtube and the preacher has a whiteboard, RUN!
???
@@andreaakilic9243 preachers with whiteboards have bad, incoherent theology. Otherwise, they would be able to explain what they were talking about without one.
Its more of a proverb than a rule. The barrier for entry on a whiteboard and a marker is significantly lower than a proper chaulkboard or powerpoint. Hence, the preachers who often use whiteboards are too dumb to handle powerpoint (or other related tools) or are unwilling to put significant effort into the delivery medium of their content.
@@Bl_Radio i find them the best, God bless you
@@Bl_Radioare you mentally ill or something? 😂 that is the goofiest ish I’ve heard this entire week
I feel like you are kidding. But I'm not sure lol
Why is it that the KJV is public domain and ALL other versions (pervisions) are copyrighted ?
I'll place my faith in God rather than man always !
💗🙏💗
The KJV is copyrighted google it.
Great translation
@@konstantinallinforchrist9867 The words themselves are public domain. If maps, glossaries, concordances, etc. are added, then the Copyright status applies. We either have God's words preserved, as He promised, or we don't. You have a free will, given by Him also. Psalm 12:6,7 KJV
🙏💓🙏
@@michaelhudzik4488 Reality is that the words ARE copyrighted.
The ASV for example doesn't have a copyright anymore, it expired. Does it matter? I don't think so.
One time God spoke to me and actually quoted the NIV believe it or not. But it was more to make a point I believe as I was obsessing about bible versions at that time.
I like the KJV, its literary beauty among other aspects.
Let's strive to focus on the weightier matters of the Law of Christ:
Unfeigned love out of a pure heart, genuine faith, humility (lowliness of mind and heart) and obedience to the words of Christ. (John 8:51, 10:27, 14:15,21,23,24 etc.)
God bless you! 💌
@@konstantinallinforchrist9867 Brother, if you think that the Lord God almighty quoted to you a scripture out of the NIV, please compare Revelation 22:16 and Isaiah 14:12 in both the NIV and the King James. The King James states that Jesus Christ is the bright and morning star in Rev 22, and the NIV states that Lucifer is the morning star in Isaiah 14. Can they BOTH be correct. This is just ONE example. Did God preserve His words or did he need man to change His words to make them "easier to understand." Satan came right behind God after the Lord had commanded Adam not to mess with the tree of the knowledge of good and evil and placed doubt in Eve's mind by misquoting God's command. I pray that the Holy Spirit will continue to reveal truth to us, His children, that we may be able to help save souls to His kingdom. Stay strong in the LORD !!! Peace and blessings to you brother!
🙏💓🙏
@@michaelhudzik4488 Michael, Amen.
Please Note: Originally the KJV contained those Roman Catholic that are not part of our KJV today
No, it really did not. They were purposely put between the new and old testaments and were not considered by the translators (or God) to be part of the word of God. Only historical books.
@@dkgrace6743 EVERY english bible from Wycliffe to the king james contained the apocrypha. it is scripture because the ancient churches said they are.
@@obadiahrobinson It was not up to "ancient churches" to decision what makes up the bible. That was God's responsibility. The apocrypha was NEVER a part of the true scriptures but was place in between testaments for history purposes. They are not God's word. Jesus never quoted from them and neither does Paul. Why are you on this channel if you believe this fallacy?
@@dkgrace6743 Folks need to stop calling kjv a perfect translation. It is not. Ex. Gen.37:35
And all his sons and all his daughters rose up to comfort him; but he refused to be comforted; and he said, For I will go down into the grave unto my son mourning. Thus his father wept for him.
Grave should be translated Sheol, which is the underworld. This has led false doctrines to rise such as soul sleep. Queber is Hebrew word for grave. This is just one of many mistranslated words in kjv.
@@tyronehelm4778 So you are a Greek scholar? Maybe you just don't have it right yourself. Besides there has been many false doctrines and religions established even from the true word of God. God's perfect word in the KJB is not the cause of these fallacies or your unbelief in God's word.
But you must then have God's perfect word in your hand that God promised to keep for ever? Which one is it? Did you write it yourself? What do you use as God's perfect preserved word?
The WORD became flesh. Do you think God's word (Jesus Christ) is imperfect?
(John 1:14 [KJV])
And the Word was made flesh, and dwelt among us, (and we beheld his glory, the glory as of the only begotten of the Father,) full of grace and truth.
Folks have to stop disbelieving God and take Him at His word that the God who created ALL things can even keep His word by keeping His words. Try listening to part 2 of this lesson.
Without the correct TRANSLATION you cannot determine the correct doctrine of the Bible!
Is that so? Im pretty sure you dont understand Koine Greek or Hebrew
@@jonathanyeong324 Which bible is inspired?
@44:16 They may still exist… yet to be discovered.. :•)
While the King James translation is a great translation it is a great translation among many great translations you will get the same exact theology Doctrine and Christian practice from Reading let's say the NIV as you will from the King James we are truly blessed as Americans to have such a vast wealth of Bible translations while in other countries it's illegal
Good question why the KJV? Can't think of one good reason.
@44:49 Ron Wyatt found the Ark of the Covenant. I believe Ron Wyatt. I believe the LORD made good use of Ron Wyatt. :•)
❤
I hope I’m wrong, as three years have passed I wonder if anyone will even come across this. In 2 Timothy 2:15 the word really is not study. Ive been to the original (TR) Received Text 1611, and the exact same word letter for letter is used as in any other greek text. It is not in any way defined as study. Not saying that we shouldn’t study as I know it to be imperative that we do. However, I’m not going to make it say what I want it to. God said what He said whether we can understand it or not. There is a context around 1 Timothy 2:15 and we should study to find out exactly what God meant when He said, Be diligent to show thyself approved unto God, cutting straight The Word of Truth, etc;...
"Study" vs "Be diligent". We can be dilegent by studying. Either one works as far as I am concerned.
Congratulations you just changed God's word.
Brother I have the King James greek text 1611. Not trying to argue nor ever change God’s Word.
@@paulscott6762 Hi Paul, No agreement from me. We should then just stick the God's perfect word, which is the KJV in English. Thanks for your response brother. Have a great weekend. Study is the right word.
I do read only from the KJV.. but when talking about how Jesus sweating as if it were drops of blood, well I seen it in other bibles. Mark 1 1-2 a lot of other bibles have Jesus the son of God. So I'm not so sure what your meaning? Besides, great sermon.
Because my KJV Bible tells me so! When you read the KJV only like these Biblically misguided and miseducated KJV-onlyist guys here you get to believe that "unicorns" exist as they are mentioned (that is, erroneously translated) in the KJV Bible! Read: Numbers 23:22; 24:8; Deuteronomy 33:17; Job 39:9-12; Psalms 22:21; and Isaiah 34:7.
In the NASB Luke 4; 4 missing half the verse Acts 8; 37 missing John 1; 18 only begotten God, not only begotten Son the KJV has all those, so which is correct?
Only begotten god is a gnostic reading. Stick with the KJV.
The KJB is a decent translation. But it is neither perfect nor superior to all other translations. It also is not superior to Greek manuscripts. Idolatry is a sin, even if your idol is the KJB.
The Apocrypha was originally in the KJV. So where does that leave us?
With the 1769
It was in the KJB, but not part of the KJB. The KJB is a NT and OT.
This is the one core belief of mid acts dispensationalists that I don't agree with. To me this issue is very simple. If I gave a KJV bought to my 12 yr old daughter, there's no doubt in my mind she'd have a harder time understanding the meaning of a given verse than if I gave hera not recent translation. I was saved with an NIV. No one could tell me God didn't speak to me thru the NIV.
The one thing mid acts dispensationalists dont understand is that the Jesus and the 12 never ever spoke in Shakesperean English or Elizabethan English - so how could by their definition say that KJV is the only reliable translation?
@@jonathanyeong324 I consider myself a mid acts dispensationalist, but I agree with you. I actually think other versions are much clearer and better translations of the true meaning. Not sure why KJV only seems to be such a core tenant of this belief system, but I don't agree, and that's ok.
@@staza1 frankly I can see alot of good points in the mid acts theology but their version of 2 Tim 2:15 has been widely abused . If you look at the Greek Interlinear - the word for rihtly divided is actually "accurate handled" - not dividing the church and israel or new and old covenants.
I would have been on the side of Mid Acts Dispensationalists if they didnt promote the suprenacy of KJV and accused other Christians of being unsaved.
My belief is this I saved solely because I believe in Jesus and His death burial and resurrection - nothing more nothing less
@@jonathanyeong324 I understand what you're saying. However, keep in mind that not all mid-acts dispensationalist promote KJV only, and not all of them wrongly accuse other Christians of being unsaved. ( Although I do tend to agree that there are some that profess Christ that are not true Christians and have not been truly born again. I think the Bible supports this view).
Obviously the church publishing this channel believes KJV only, but that belief really has nothing to do with the overall concept of correctly dividing the word.
I'm also skeptical about their interpretation of 2 Timothy. However, to me that really doesn't matter much whether it means divide or accurately teach. The primary concept is simply that we need to recognize there are different time periods in the bible, and not everything said was said to us for us to obey and live by. To me this has become so obvious that I can't even imagine how anyone could think otherwise.
So I don't think mid-acts rests on KJV or 2 Timothy at all.
@@staza1 i agree but i can see it in their fruits except you of course. I do find you to be kind, gracious and teachable. However their mid acts preaching and KJV only stance seem to be a make them a judger of people's salvation which i vehemently disagree.
Did you know Jesus even love those Christians who are legalistic and unkind too? It doesnt make them unsaved if they do indeed believe in Jesus' death burial and resurrection.
My people are Chinese and they dont know a word of English let alone KJV english but that doesnt make them unsaved if they dont get all their theology right
40:37 both versions, NIV, and ESV, contain 'every word of God ', at least in the online published editions. Maybe they were footnotes or italicised in the original paper versions?
I do acknowledge that removing verses (16 at least) ans words (thousands) and putting them as footnotes in these versions exist and show they are not good versions, undermining our faith in God's word and the preservation of God's word.
There are dozens of aspects to consider in what we mean by preservation.. consider this teaching as a primer in the topic and not authoritative or final. Look at the bible as a whole. God's word has always been preserved, even before there was a bible, and despite every bible having errors, interpretations, corrections, omissions, additons, changes etc. Some are more accurate (either in translation accuracy or conveyancing of meaning accuracy) than others, none are 100% accurate in any or all aspects.
'Every word of God' is missing in Luke 4:4 not the Matthew reference.
Luke 4:4 (KJV) "And Jesus answered him, saying, It is written, That man shall not live by bread alone, but by every word of God."
Luke 4:4 (ESV) "And Jesus answered him, “It is written, ‘Man shall not live by bread alone.’”
Luke 4:4 (NIV) "Jesus answered, “It is written: ‘Man shall not live on bread alone.’”
"none are 100% accurate in any or all aspects" - For this to be confirmed, there has to be a 100% accurate text somewhere to compare to and make this judgment. This statement is either self-defeating or axiomatic. Neither bodes well for a Bible believer.
@@GraceAmbassadors as to axiomatic , perhaps we have different understandings of axiomatic, but as to self defeating that's your opinion which can be proved incorrect.
There doesn't need to be a 100% perfect bible on earth to compare them all with to know for sure each have inaccuracies. If you have what you believe a 100% accurate bible let me know and we can discuss. Until then I know my understanding is reliable in this matter.
P.s. the errors in the KJV are widely accepted and catalogued, yet it is my preferred reading version for numerous reasons and I rely on the word of God in that English format. My understanding of it's minimal errors in no way undermines my faith in God or the preservation of his word for all believers through all time. Having a 99.9% accurate image of a bird doesn't mean I have to doubt the whole picture or my perception of the image because of the 0.1% inaccurate portion. Just as having a 100% accurate but 1% area of it is useful and not dismissed just because it is incomplete.
The statement 'doesn't bode well for the believer' is reminiscent of statements I heard in a cult I once was part of. Check yourself on your faith, whether finding out your bible isn't accurate would ruin or undermine your faith. My boding is just fine, how is yours?
Since there is ONE GOD there should only be ONE book.
There's no decree from Yahweh that declares that there be only one book in a single 17th century Germanic language.
Lord Jesus said go into all the world and preach the Gospel to every creature; which necessary means that words of the Bible would be preached and read in different languages; i.e., multiple books of Yahweh's words. The English language was certainly not around at the time that commandment was given.
@@InfinitelyManicYahweh is a desert pagan nobody. Jehovah is his name
@@ntkmw8058 "Yahweh is a desert pagan nobody. Jehovah is his name" -- Upon what basis do you say this?
For by grace are ye saved through faith; and that not of yourselves: it is the gift of God:
Eph.2.8 KJV
Please note the often neglected part of the above verse "and that not of yourselves". The "that" can only refer to "faith" because grace cannot come from yourselves.
The KJV is the only Bible I know of which defines this faith that is not of yourselves. It's found in Gal 2:16, it is the Faith of Christ.
We are justified (saved) through the Faith of Christ. This is the faith which came after the law. Gal 3:23
God deals with the Jews one way and the Gentiles in a different way.
Seeing it is one God, which shall justify the circumcision by faith, and uncircumcision through faith. Rom.3.30 KJV
Amen.
ahem the NT is in GREEK!!!! Think on!!!NO "translation" please!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Ok, so I get KJV only to an extent but what concerns me is that my 1611 kjv has changed and so have many others. Many believe through supernatural or black magic. KJV onlyists either don't see it or refuse to talk about it.
One day I was reading my KJV Bible out loud and I was like what did I just read it was pure nonsense. No one in the group noticed b/c they read other Bible versions so I guess they figured they didn't understand b/c it was the KJV.
Please someone from the KJV only group tell me why you won't talk about what is happening to the Bible. Jesus is the true word of God who will never change, the Bible are the scriptures and it is changing all of them into something I do not recognize. Tell me you are not seeing this in your KJV.
Yes. The Mandela Effect is terrible. The thing to remember is that only physical information can be changed....but not spiritual reality.
Any changes that were made in the KJV does not effect how salvation is attained. The Gospel of Grace that was revealed to Paul has not been affected....and only that information is pertinent to the Body of Christ for Paul is our template.
We learn from the rest of the bible, but it is not central to our salvation.
1 CORINTHIANS 2:2 For I determined not to know anything among you, save Jesus Christ and Him crucified.
The Mandela Effect is a rabbit hole that is designed to confuse and draw people away from the truth. If a person is aware of it...that is good...but do not focus exclusively on it. It is a Satanic deception (not saying it isn't real).
You’re a victim of psy ops my friend. The word of God can’t be changed, especially supernaturally
Eccles. 8:4
@Grace Ambassadors: DEar Sir, I am sorry to burst your entire bubble, but a spade should be called a spade. Herebelow are true facts and figures of what all your Lecture and this accolades-flooded kjv Project is worth.
First and foremost, there wouldn't be ANY so-called "King James Bible" had it not been for one avid and thirsty for power tyrant who couldn't part with, but rather clutched to this power-insane desire to retain his one single bottom on the two whole thrones of England and Scotland. And who was also obsessed by the concept of "The Divine Right of Kings" , a teddybear surrealistic fabulous theory of his own fancy which, from his point of view, gave him a license to act like a vicar of God on Planet Earth. However, The Geneva Bible being in predominant circulation of the folks of England, Scotland, Wales and Ireland didn't agree with this surrealistic theory of his and called a spade a spade in every aspect of the English, Scottish and Irish (and, later, American) life. So he made up his mind to burk it completely by inventing his own brainchild that would comfortably sit well with his political and social aspirations and suit his power-thirsty notions likewise.
Here are specific facts and figures which go the whole hog and depict this KJV version together with its pompously tough sponsor James all nine yards.
1.. Genesis 22;1 the KJV says: "And after these things God did tempt Abraham". Now, does God really tempt a person? Is God involved in the business of temptation? When even in KJV in The Epistle of James in the N.T. it is explicitly indicated: "for God tempts no one, neither is tempted by evil..." So how come, then, the KJV translators depict God as the tempter in the O.T. and speak well of God Almighty the way it duly becomes of Him in the New one? Does God change????????????????????? WHO, what creature is in the business of tempting people? Is it not satan?
In contrast, The Geneva Bible reads: "And after these things God did PROVE Abraham" which I believe is the TRUE and correct conveyance from the Hebrew original. The terms "TEMPT" and "PROVE" are never synonyms! I hope you would kindly agree with it . God NEVER tempts anyone, God TESTS us, but NEVER tempts - the business of tempting belongs to satan and his demons (Luke 4:1-4)
.2. Genesis 15:6 "And Abraham believed in God and God credited it to him as righteousness". Good grief... didn't Abraham commence to believing IN God since the very inception when God called out to him in Genesis chapter 12 to "leave his country and his people and go to the land God was about to show Abraham"? Did not Abraham believe in God's existence back then? According to the Book of Jasher, Abraham was considered to be the disciple of Noah. And, using Noah, God had been in the thorough process of teaching and guiding Abraham in all things. Therefore, before Abraham had ever reached Genesis chapter 15, he already was in cognition of God, doubtlessly being aware of His entire existence!
In contrast The Geneva Bible signifies lucidly in Genesis 15:6 that. "Abraham BELIEVED The Lord" (not IN the Lord)! And there is also a reference to this verse in Hebrews quoting this verse without "IN"!
3. Psalm 24:6 the KJV says: "of those who seek your face, O Jacob". Now a question, WHOSE face it's deemed for everyone to seek? The face of God, or the face of Jacob, who himself was the one who sought God and prayed to Him?
In contrast, The Geneva Bible says in this verse: "of those who seek your face, this is Jacob" which appears t be the paramount pertinent, intrinsic and lucid one due to its palpable logically reasonable consistence.
4. In N.T. in The Book of Acts chapter 14 it is being narrated about the Passover taking place in the days of Unleavened Bread with king Herod killing Apostle James with the sword and "because he saw it pleased the Jews, he proceeded further to take Peter also". The KJV names this period as "The Easter" which can by no means be attributed to this Glorious Event ! But much rather, easter is a revelry-boozing,impurity-cracking pagan feast which was totally illegal in Israel under the penalty of the participants being stoned to death! In contrast, The Geneva Bible puts THE CORRECT TERM to this Event: "The Passover" instead of this negligibly obscure term "easter".
5. 1 Samuel chapter 16 verse 14, where the KJV puts it, that "The Spirit of The Lord departed from Saul, and an evil spirit of The Lord vexed him". A grievous insult upon The Lord again! Do evil spirits co-exist in the Lord"s Kingdom?
In contrast, the Geneva Bible translated it this way: "and an evil spirit SENT of The Lord, vexed him "(emphasis mine). THIS word SENT makes a bombastic, mind-blowing difference indeed. It clearly points out, that The Lord is Sovereign in the Universe, commanding everyone and everything He deems necessary to, for the purpose of carrying out His Sovereign Will!
6. Isaiah 60:1, KJV "Arise, shine. For thy light is come, and the glory of the Lord is risen upon thee."
Can anyone perspiciously explicate WHO is being addressed here? WHOM is all this speech conveyed to?
The Geneva Bible says it clearly: "Arise, O Jrusalem, be bright. For thy light is come. And the glory of the Lord is risen upon thee". Here the subject is at face salience. It is Jerusalem that the emphasis is focused upon.
7. Mark 16:18 " They shall take up serpents (KJV). Sorry... what is the point for the disciples to take up serpents? Were they\ disciples meant to caress the serpents like babies in their arms? Does it make any sense?
In contrast, the Geneva Bible is crystal clear about it: "And they shall take away serpents".
"Take up" and "Take away' are not one and same peas in a pod! It is a different story altigether. And it is paramount evident that the "Take away" option is more relevant here, because it emphatically and robustly corroborates what The Lord told the disciples: "I give you power to tread on serpents and scorpions and nothing shall, by any means hurt you". .
8. The Gospel of John 3:36, KJV: "He that believeth the Son hath everlasting life, and he that believeth not the Son shall not see life but the wrath abideth on him
The Gospel of John 3:36 (Geneva) "He that believeth the Son hath everlasting life, and he that obeyeth not the Son shall not see life but the wrath abideth on him" .
So these are just a few facts of distorted translation which are clear and evident to making a point and difference as to what Bible version is worthy of trust and reliance on.
Last but not the least, Hugh Willoughby, an outspoken in word and action Hebraist scholar and contemprorary of King James time, spoke his mind about this King James Project this way, quote: " I would rather be tied and torn apart by wild horses than allow such horrible translation be foisted on English people".
On the other hand, John Adams, the 7-th US Prsident said thus about the Geneva Bible, quote: "Let not Geneva be forgotten or despised, We owe it our utmost liberty"
There is NO genuine evidence of any Us Founding Father who would use or quote The King James Project. All of them as well as such outstanding characters as, William Bradford, John Milton, John Knox, John Bunyan and the Pilgrims, all of them used The Geneva Bible, and the rightly. For an obviously good reason. Due to its God-inspired nature and absolutely correct translation from the choicest best Hebrew and Greek manuscripts available at that time in Geneva, Switzerland under the guidance of The Lord and his vessels, John Calvin and William Wittingham.
May The Lord help you , Gentlemen in your endeavours to follow the unique and sole guidance of His and secure you from any temptations and deviations. Blessings
Moses was never a slave.. Sad that you said he was. He was raised under Pharoah.. Hmm 🤔
Good question why the KJV? No scriptural reason why we should read the KJV. That is why I prefer to read modern more accurate modern translations.
KJB is 5th grade level...NIV is 7th grade level.
You don’t need the Bible to get someone saved? So do you believe that this people are gonna believe from the heart what you teach them? Oh brother better study more, this lost people are blinded because the god of this world has them trap
2 Corinthians 4:3,6
3 But if our gospel be hid, it is hid to them that are lost:
4 In whom the god of this world hath blinded the minds of them which believe not, lest the light of the glorious gospel of Christ, who is the image of God, should shine unto them.
5 For we preach not ourselves, but Christ Jesus the Lord; and ourselves your servants for Jesus' sake.
6 For God, who commanded the light to shine out of darkness, hath shined in our hearts, to give the light of the knowledge of the glory of God in the face of Jesus Christ.
I get it. You like KJV. But let’s not start speaking like them in modern conversation. “Spake” really???