This series was eye opening! I was blessed by these teachings! Thank you!! I never understood the KJV argument until recently. When other Bible translations started adding “ repent of your sins” when it’s not actually in the Bible that’s when I had to take the KJV argument seriously. We’re talking about our eternity here people.
The more I studied the KJV the more I discovered that it’s extremely flawed having used Latin rather than Greek along side the notations that were used to add to the Bible. The NASB is far superior for a literal word for word translation. Furthermore, I don’t believe that God would limit His word to a select group of English speaking people but here we are saying otherwise seeing how the KJV was only written in English. Not fair to all the other languages on the planet. Read a Bible you can clearly understand. What’s the point otherwise? KJ had an issue with the already written English translations that presently existed. He had ulterior motives behind having it re-translated. And lastly, the language is outdated and that’s why the ones that are being published aren’t the original language used.
I think you have misconstrued what this man is saying. There are King James-only people who claim that the KJV is now officially the only inspired Bible for the world, but this man does not appear to be one of them. He's addressing English Bibles only, not what might be the best translation in other languages. You are putting into his mouth things which he did not say or imply.
I heard of Westcott and Hort from a pastor I love at temple Baptist church in Knoxville Tn. He said the same thing you are teaching. He is a wonderful fire and brimstone preacher that looks exactly like the preacher I grew up listening to. He is wonderful and you should contact him. I’m 78 years old and I’m thankful to be able to get so many Bible teachers and preachers. As just a simple Bible teacher died in 2023. Les Feldick and I have studied under him for over 30 years.
If you want the truth about Wescott and Hort Mark Ward just put out a video not defending but not putting down just stating verifiable facts on the truth about what they believed
In the first 3 videos of this series this church has skyrocketed to the top of my list of favorite churches. Oh how I wish I had a church like this locally. God bless your ministry from the bottom of my heart!
Excellent. Thank you. I am a KJV believer. I'm so grateful the LORD got me onto the KJV. I have listened to and read other things about this issue and you have made it so much easier to understand. May the LORD bless you, your family and your ministry.
Another problem with English translations is that each one has to avoid similarities to the others in order to avoid copyright laws! That has driven considerable departures!
Amen it’s a big deal!! “For I testify unto every man that heareth the words of the prophecy of this book, If any man shall add unto these things, God shall add unto him the plagues that are written in this book: 19 And if any man shall take away from the words of the book of this prophecy, God shall take away his part out of the book of life, and out of the holy city, and from the things which are written in this book.”
I have talked to pastor Tom about this personally... I am guilty of doing this.. when I was texting someone I intentionally changed the words of the verse when texting someone I was young and stupid and in a time of anger and not sound mind. but pastor Tom helped me understand that if I've believed in Jesus then I'm forgiven. I was in torment over this for over a year.. believing God took my part out of the book of life but I confessed it and repented of it.
@@jordanc1910 Bless your heart. Grace is *such* a difficult, if not impossible concept for us humans to grasp! I'm still trying to grasp it - usually can't - and so I've moved into the sphere of, doesn't matter if I "get it", I'm taking it-I receive Your grace! Thanks, Lord!!!
@@jessstone7486 Can you not know you are saved? Jesus said his yoke is easy, and his burden is light. The simplicity of the gospel is that you come to Jesus in faith, and he fills you with his Spirit, translating you into his kingdom; clothing you with his righteousness; freeing you from sin, Death, and God's wrath. You become a new creature. You are his. The person who has his name removed from the Book of Life is one who dies without Christ.
Westcott & Hort practically scrubbed the NT of God’s promises to Israel, aligning it with Augustine’s idea that the church is the new or spiritual Israel (Roman Catholicism). One obvious example is Gal 2:7 - KJV: “but contrariwise, when they saw that the gospel OF the uncircumcision was committed unto me, as the gospel OF the circumcision was unto Peter;” All modern versions change both of these “of”s to “to.” The gospel (good news) of the circumcision: Messiah is here to be our promised King, to restore Israel, to judge the nations, and establish His kingdom on earth (see Psalms, prophets). The gospel of the uncircumcision: Paul’s gospel. God is doing something completely new. NOW, ALL people can have eternal life, through faith alone, apart from Law, apart from Israel.
I couldn't agree more. From my understanding one of the main problems is with two of the texts that went into the corrupt critical text, namely the codices Vaticanus and Sinaiaticus. These two texts came out of Alexandria in Egypt, a centre of Gnosticism. There is good reason to believe the texts were not considered reliable by the early Christians, and they certainly were not considered good enough to be extemplars for copying from. Give me the Authorised Version any time.
So many people don't know this, maybe because it takes too much effort to look into this truth, but people will be people and laziness is one of our biggest enemies. KJV was born out of the most intellectual era's in the history of time (1694-1778) One of the translators was FLUENT IN 38 DIFFERENT LANGUAGES and the LEAST FLUENT HAD 8 DIFFERENT LANUAGES, and English, Hebrew, Greek & Aramaic was a must. How many people can you find today that even come close to the least of the translators of the KJV. Great point "casting doubt"- ''hath God said?" PREACH IT Ptr Tom!!
Amen! One scripture that jumped out at me was in Revelation where John said "I stand in the shore" paraphrasing and the NIV says "the Dragon is who stood on the shore" 🙄🙄🙄 tossed NIV. Yes KJV is harder to understand for me... but I would understand less if what is right....
@Freedom Fighter Chick -- A hint to easier understand the KJB: YE always means you and is singular... Thee and Thou are always plural. That helped me a LOT and truly, the Holy Spirit WILL lead you to all truth, so pray before you read.. You'll learn the KJB quickly, and it is worth it as you have God's PURE and UNCHANGED word! God bless!!
@@TheMistysFavs Actually, "ye" means you and it's PLURAL, vs "thou", which is you SINGULAR! When the King James Bible says "ye", it's talking to a group of people, not one person, vs "thou" when it's talking to one person!!
Whatever couldn't be brought over due to the language difference, the King James makes up for and you actually get stuff in the King James that you won't get in the Greek and Hebrew.
Look at Ez 33:13-20 re the idea that righteous people that go back into sin , it says to they will die. What is your answer to this? Did it change from old to new Testament because of Christ? Ron Mostyn
That passage is talking about the judgement God was about to bring on Israel for they their wickedness as a nation. When it says death there it is not talking about heaven vs hell. It's talking about there physical death. God was basically saying that if the righteous turned to sin he would not spare their life but on the other hand if the wicked turned to righteousness he would spare their lives. He was basically telling everyone that had one last chance to survive the impleading judgment about to be brought unto Israel.
I'm not King James Only rather Masoretic/Majority Text Only, the manuscript basis of the KJV and in my personal Bible study, it is the version I primarily use. It is safe and I do find it generally easier to read and memorize particular verses compared to other translations. I reject any version that is predicated on the Critical Text as the vast bulk of modern versions are and this message by Pastor Tom is a well reasoned and presented rebuttal against such.
When I told my mom that the NLT should be brought to the bathroom and used for .....you know. She said I had the spirit of Satan. Hahaha!!! KJV only for this fella! 👍👍👊
I'm not fond of that particular translation, but I wouldn't say that either, bc it still says a lot of what God intended. The same message can be spoken in many different ways. It is not a great translation for word for word accuracy, but that doesn't mean it doesn't contain some of God's words, that is, the messages which He intended. The NLT contains within its pages the true Gospel, which is faith in Jesus Christ. So anyone outright saying the NLT should be used as toilet paper is also saying that the Gospel itself should be used as toilet paper 🧻 . Think about that. So I think out of respect for the Gospel and out of our fear of God, and the many messages that are conveyed correctly within the NLT, which are God's messages we should not say such things. Yes, the NLT is not a great translation, but it does contain much of God's words/messages
Therefore the NLT still has God's fingerprint. The Gospel message is still intact. I have respect for these things. I think you do too if you're seeing what I'm saying clearly A translation is just a tool to help us understand God's message more clearly. Some of these "tools" have been dinged up pretty badly, but I am still seeing much of God's truth coming through, so i want to handle these tools with respect and delicacy. In some cases, within some smaller passages some of the newer translations (tools) actually convey the message a little more clearly than the KJV, even though the KJV "tool" is in overall better condition. I think God intended it this way to show that His word is above translations, to keep His people from idolatry. This is one of the reasons why I recommend reading other translations alongside the KJV while checking the closest the the original greek/hebrew/Aramaic and above all asking for discernment from the Holy Spirit. God's word is not a translation. It is not the KJV. God's word transcends translations, but it can be found within many translations. It is sacred. It is Holy. Remember this
@@Liam0408 Go back and re-read your own comment. It is filled with compromise and half truth statements.... "It still has a lot of what God intended."? "It's not a great translation for word for word accuracy, but that doesn't mean it doesn't contain 'some' of God's words."? You're justifying yourself way too much by your personal subjective reasoning. The word of God is infallible and inerrant word for word. By your statement, you already contradicted yourself, and obviously didn't even realize it. Psalms 12:6-7. 6The words of the LORD are pure words: as silver tried in a furnace of earth, purified seven times. 7Thou shalt keep them, O LORD, thou shalt preserve them from this generation for ever.
Versions do matter and I love my KJV, but if people only have those false versions, God can use those bibles to get people saved until they are exposed to the truth that those versions are not accurate.
I know that there are many English bible translations out there , does anyone know about the Greens literal translation also known as the King James three , it is supposed to have been based on the same manuscript as the King James version, is that true?
Plus, they did not believe in the true Word of God: "Ya hath God said." Even if I spoke 27 languages, including Hebrew and Greek, I still would not translate God's word. The people who translated the critical text, including Westtcot and Hort, did not believe in the deity of Jesus Christ nor the power of salvation, and even the first 3 chapters of Genesis are not honest.
Also the docs - 3part series… A Lamp in the Dark, Tares Among the Wheat, Bridge to Babylon. Great series! You will see just where all of these corrupt bible versions came from!
The Old Testament and New Testament were never written in Latin. The Latin Vulagte is Catholic. Doth thou believe the Catholic Church is the real Church or of the Devil?
Note: The version of the NASB you used for 1 John 3:9 must be older. My translation says "No one who has been born of God practices sin, because His seed remains in him; and he cannot sin continually, because he has been born of God." Note the added "continually".
This further supports your point that, these versions change and update over time which often deduct from the true meaning.. The seed is our new nature which cannot sin because it is of God.. This verse is not talking about our fleshly nature which does continue to sin as you mentioned.
You must be using the 2020 edition of the NASB. The 95 edition of the NASB doesn't have "continually". There is contention with the 2020 edition of the NASB. It leans towards the liberal side of things. When it was released, conservatives and a lot of people who were long-time uses of the 95 NASB were not happy with the changes. The true heir to the 95 NASB is the LSB (Legacy Standard Bible). I would recommend that over the 2020 NASB.
I’ve never heard some of this. I absolutely thought the purpose of a modern translation was to match the language of the present. Which version of the KJV is perfect? Was it 1612, 1613, 1616, 1629, 1638, or 1769? Or was the 1611, the end to all, translations? At what point in history are we to stop?
Yes the goal of some of these translates is to hopefully provide a more understandable translation. However, not all translations are equal for a number of reasons. 1) They need to start with the correct text stream or original manuscripts. There are alternate manuscripts which are corrupt or modified and can't be trusted. So the first thing you need to do when choosing a Bible is make sure it's from the correct text stream (Textus Receptus). 2) Secondly you should strive to use a Bible translation that is a word for word translation. Part of the issue with some translations is the translators put their own ideas and thoughts into the translation and misrepresent topics. Which end up causing people to believe the wrong thing. Some even go so far as to purposefully manipulate passages to fit their ideas. Things such as removing or changing words to make it look like Jesus Christ was only human and is not God. Changing salvation verses to make it look like you need to earn your way to heaven and so on. The KJV is not perfect nor infallible but it's pretty close and probably one of the best word for word translations out there. Pastor is not saying that you must only use the KJV. He's just explaining why he uses it and what to watch out for if you plan to use other translations.
If I don't have a perfect translation I will need to constantly BUY ANOTHER ONE. I've personally seen on more than one occasion how Satan can use just a single word to affect someone's belief about Christ deity and the gospel. I know it matters which version you use. I was saved with the KJV back in 1977 and I think I'll just stick with that until I leave this earthly tabernacle and go on to heaven.
One question, and I’m not trying to mock anyone, but I also have an ESV MacArthur Study Bible, a Dr. Charles F Stanley Life Principles Bible, and other Bibles. I want nothing to do with John MacArthur any more, I don’t want to sell misinformation to someone else, but I also don’t want to throw any of them in the garbage, because they are SUPPOSED to be the word of God. That said, I’m in kind of a rut. Suggestions, please!
If those Bible translations would cause a lost person to be lead astray on the Gospel or cause a believer to be led astray about their faith then I would toss them out (shred them even). I think God cares more about the accuracy of his Word. The physical book it self should not be worshiped but rather the truth it beholds. If the book does not contain all of God's truth then it's not his Word but rather man's word.
I have enjoyed the sermon on Calvinism and also the one on Lordship Salvation and to a certain extent the one on Corrupt Bible Translations, however I will have to mostly disagree with you on the KJV which has misled many to misinterpretation. For instance when it says when shall be the sign of thy coming and of the end of the world, many believe this has to do with the destruction of the planet, but it's not talking about the kosmos but the completion of the age, which had to do with the end of old covenant Israel. If it wasn't for the Greek- English Interlinear I would be lost in my interpretation and be led astray into a completely different scenario.
Thank you Pastor much needed message. Maybe one day God will lead you to prepare another message on the parable of the ten virgins five were wise and 5 were foolish Mt 25:.
We need more teaching on the pet verses of lordship advocates. Sadly neglected. It’s fine to proclaim the truth of the obvious verses that prove eternal security, but there are several that the LS camp have a field day with.
I have used the NKJV for many years after seeing how my NIV was corrupted . Some try defend NIV saying if we use its earliest versions it is ok and that through time it became more corrupted. While this is true, now I understand how its roots were from the wrong foundation as the pastor explains here. I compare my NKJV with KJV and it seems to hold to the truth of God’s word with only less ‘ these and thous’. Please correct me if I have missed something here. Thank you
This was the best of the series on Trojan Horses in the Church Today, hopefully there will be future additions to this series. He is saying exactly what I have been seeing going on in the church for 30 years. It all leads back to Rome.
No, you would use the Modern King James Bible, which is usually the 7th edition (1769) of the 7th Modern English Bible (Tyndale, Coverdale, Matthew, Great, Geneva, Bishop's, King James/Authorised) of the 7th Language of the Scriptures (Hebrew, Aramaic, Greek, Syriac, Old Latin, German, Modern English).
There are some idioms that are figures of speech that are translated differently in English vs Spanish, for example, "God forbid," is rendered in our Spanish Reina Valera as "De ninguna manera," which means "May it never be." Also, some things that are masculine in English are feminine in Spanish, example, the Word of God is "la Palabra de Dios". Just letting you know that that's the way it is because I myself do translations from English to Spanish and vice versa. When we wanna say, "My name is Alma," in Spanish, the way we talk it is, "Me llamo Alma," and not "Mi nombre es Alma." A good translation is one that if you read it, it sounds like the way people talk in that language, and not something that would come out of Google translate that it sounds weird. I am against all those new modern false Bible versions, too! God bless you.
I’m all for having the EXACT Translation! But when I was Born Again, I was reading and NIV Bible in my back bedroom, I told Jesus idk if your real but I wanna know. I read Genesis and really did like he said, seek him with ALL of my heart. And that’s when my eyes were opened! I thought I went crazy lol I could see the truth! And that was reading NIV…. So idk where I stand with all these translations.
NIV is a very good translation. It's a valid opinion to say the KJV is "better", but the NIV is 99% identical in meaning and is still the "Word of God" as closely as we can get it in English. What matters is that you hear what God is saying and follow it, He will lead you the rest of the way. If you ever find a translation difference between versions that bothers you, go and seek advice from a wise elder and stay focused on the parts that you are still certain of.
@@destinycoach5 NKJV is not good either. I would go with KJV anyway even though the language may be hard to understand ask the holy spirit for understanding and you can look up the archaic words in a dictionary.
You start by saying a translation can be contradictory to the "word of God". Then I soon hear what you think the "word of God" is. It's nice to settleth on a standard, but is it really that easy? Tradition aside, looking objectively, have you examined all the manuscripts used to create the KJ translation? (or any of the other translations?) Have you scrutinized all the manuscripts that were available to the KJ translators and understood why they may have preferred some over others? Was their judgment always the best? Have additional manuscripts that were not available or not used 400 years ago shown problems with the KJV? Aside from dogmatism, how can you worry about present translational contradictions until you understand and resolve all manuscript inconsistencies, variations, and contradictions? Even rejecting manuscripts outside the Masoretic/Textus Receptus streams doesn't resolve the problem of variant readings nor remove the need of human translators to apply their judgements of best source and best word choice.
This book may help answer some of your question. www.amazon.com/Unbroken-Bible-Incredible-History-Accuracy/dp/0998480479/ref=sr_1_1?qid=1701739687&refinements=p_27%3ADr.+Phil+Stringer&s=books&sr=1-1
Here is a good illustration of removing the jot and the tittle. What do you read or get out of this sentence? GODISNOWHERE. ? You can either get..... God is now here. Or you may read it as God is no where ! That is why we do not change the word of GOD!
When I saw that the NIV says are being saved implying salvation is a process whereas the KJV says are saved implying an event I now know that the KJV is the English translation for me!!! Should be for everyone!!!
Though I use the KJV, it is not without flaws itself. One major flaw is found in Acts 12:4 where the word 'pascha' is translated 'Easter'. That verse should read 'Passover', as it is written that Christ became our Passover (1 Cor 5:7). As a result, the whole Christian world has referred to the day in which we remember Christ resurrected as 'Easter' which it is not. Easter, from wherever it's roots comes from (which is another discussion), is not in scripture. When we celebrate the resurrection we should be referring to it as Passover for Christ was the Passover lamb slain. I do not mean what is known today as the Jewish Passover (that is another issue). There is no way that this is even a mistranslation for in no language can pascha be translated as Easter, therefore this must be a deliberate attack on the sacred text, no doubt by a scribe back in the day of King James. If we are not supposed to fool around with the text then this should be taken seriously and we should repent and correct our error.
I followed you regarding Calvinism because i have studied it. When you got to the bible translation dispute on the the KJV, you showed your lack of language skill in translation - by your own admission! You would serve your church better if you were better prepared in both English grammer and Hebrew and Greek. KJV translators had problems with getting their greek version from Erasmus’s work. Check it out. Erasmus was not finished with his work when he delivered it to the KJV translators.
They used Biza and Stephanus too. Plus they had dozens of manuscripts from Old Latin (not Latin Vulgate), Syriac Peshitta, which are of older tradition, etc ... To say they only used Greek is pretty dumb
People will argue against the KJV because they still REJECT JESUS CHRIST; and the KJV is all about the deity of Jesus Christ. “ . “ Strait is the gate, and Narrow is the way”...”few there be that find it”.
I like the KJV and read it often, but be careful with that. Other translations may be flawed, but many of them still illustrate the deity of Jesus Christ quite clearly. Do not conflate reading the KJV translation with faith in Jesus Christ. There are plenty of people who are saved that do not read the KJV. Don't let pride cloud your judgement. Plenty of translations present the diety of Jesus and the plan for salvation quite clearly despite their flaws. The Gospel is still the Gospel, even if it is contained in an inferior translation. We are saved through faith in Jesus Christ alone, not faith in Christ *plus* KJV onlyism. Anytime anything is added to the Gospel, it is a false Gospel. The pastor himself has mentioned this quite often
@@Liam0408 Let's be clear, the preacher just explained it is not just about the KJV but about the original text (Masoretic or Textus Receptus), if other versions uses the right manuscript that is what is most important.
You are not studied in the problems of the textus receptus or how Erasmus completed his work early using the Latin vulgate. Please do a better job of preparation.
Confession of sins is for the believer and is necessary for restoring your fellowship with God. There's a distinction between your relationship and fellowship with God. When you accept the payment Jesus Christ made on the cross for your sins then all of your sins are forgiven and you obtain eternal life. You are born into the family of God as one of his children. This creates a relationship between you and God. A relationship that can never be broken (just like when humans give birth to children). Therefore you can know you are going to heaven no matter what you do. 1 John 5:13 - These things have I written unto you that believe on the name of the Son of God; that ye may know that ye have eternal life, and that ye may believe on the name of the Son of God. However, if a believer sins he breaks his fellowship with God. You are no longer walking with God and in order to restore your fellowship you need to confess to God your sin. Confession means to agree with God. You agree with God that what you did was wrong and you see it as he does. He will then forgive you of that sin in order to restore fellowship. However, during all of this you never lost your relationship, you are still his child and you will still be going to heaven. 1 John 1:9 - If we confess our sins, he is faithful and just to forgive us our sins, and to cleanse us from all unrighteousness. Pastor has a series on 1 John explaining this further. th-cam.com/play/PL2B4ebzvFXJDujskMdfehbmnbAC6wC86K.html
@beautifulbuds The NKJV also includes some "Critical text" readings, even though they claim it is only based on the Textus Receptus. But it is not only that. There are many issues to long to mention. The KJV was translated by the best scholars the world has ever put together. There won't ever be another translation in English that matches up
1 John 5:7 a foundational trinity verse. (below source is biblegateway) KJ21 For there are three that bear record in Heaven: the Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost; and these three are one. ASV And it is the Spirit that beareth witness, because the Spirit is the truth. AMP For there are three witnesses: AMPC So there are three witnesses in heaven: the Father, the Word and the Holy Spirit, and these three are One; BRG For there are three that bear record in heaven, the Father, the Word , and the Holy Ghost: and these three are one. CSB For there are three that testify: CEB The three are testifying- CJB There are three witnesses - CEV In fact, there are three who tell about it. DARBY For they that bear witness are three: DLNT Because the ones testifying are three: DRA And there are three who give testimony in heaven, the Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost. And these three are one. ERV So there are three witnesses that tell us about Jesus: EHV In fact, there are three that testify: ESV For there are three that testify: ESVUK For there are three that testify: EXB ·So [or For] there are three ·witnesses [who testify/bear witness]: GNV For there are three, which bear record in heaven, the Father, the Word, and the holy Ghost: and these three are one. GW There are three witnesses: GNT There are three witnesses: HCSB For there are three that testify: ICB So there are three witnesses: ISV For there are three witnesses in heaven-the Father, the Word, and the Holy Spirit, and these three are one. PHILLIPS Jesus Christ himself is the one who came by water and by blood-not by the water only, but by the water and the blood. The Spirit bears witness to this, for the Spirit is the truth. The witness therefore is a triple one-the Spirit in our own hearts, the signs of the water of baptism and the blood of atonement-and they all say the same thing. If we are prepared to accept human testimony, God’s own testimony concerning his own Son is surely infinitely more valuable. The man who really believes in the Son of God will find God’s testimony in his own heart. The man who will not believe God is making him out to be a liar, because he is deliberately refusing to accept the testimony that God has given concerning his own Son. This is, that God has given men eternal life and this real life is to be found only in his Son. It follows naturally that any man who has genuine contact with Christ has this life; and if he has not, then he does not possess this life at all. JUB For there are three that bear witness in heaven, the Father, the Word, and the Holy Spirit; and these three are one. KJV For there are three that bear record in heaven, the Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost: and these three are one. AKJV For there are three that bear record in heaven, the Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost: and these three are one. LEB For there are three that testify, TLB And we know he is, because God said so with a voice from heaven when Jesus was baptized, and again as he was facing death-yes, not only at his baptism but also as he faced death.* And the Holy Spirit, forever truthful, says it too. So we have these three witnesses: the voice of the Holy Spirit in our hearts, the voice from heaven at Christ’s baptism, and the voice before he died.* And they all say the same thing: that Jesus Christ is the Son of God.* MSG Jesus-the Divine Christ! He experienced a life-giving birth and a death-killing death. Not only birth from the womb, but baptismal birth of his ministry and sacrificial death. And all the while the Spirit is confirming the truth, the reality of God’s presence at Jesus’ baptism and crucifixion, bringing those occasions alive for us. A triple testimony: the Spirit, the Baptism, the Crucifixion. And the three in perfect agreement. MEV There are three who testify in heaven: the Father, the Word, and the Holy Spirit, and the three are one. MOUNCE For there are three that testify: NOG There are three witnesses: NABRE So there are three that testify, NASB For there are three that testify: NASB1995 For there are three that testify: NCB Thus, there are three witnesses, NCV So there are three witnesses: NET For there are three that testify, NIRV There are three that are witnesses about Jesus. NIV For there are three that testify: NIVUK For there are three that testify: NKJV For there are three that bear witness in heaven: the Father, the Word, and the Holy Spirit; and these three are one. NLV There are three Who speak of this in heaven: the Father and the Word and the Holy Spirit. These three are one. NLT So we have these three witnesses- NMB (For there are three that bear witness in heaven: the Father, the word, and the Holy Spirit; and these three are one.) NRSV There are three that testify: NRSVA There are three that testify: NRSVACE There are three that testify: NRSVCE There are three that testify: NTE There are three that bear witness, you see, OJB Because there are shloshah giving solemn eidus: TPT So we have these three constant witnesses giving their evidence: RGT For there are Three Who bear record in Heaven: the Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost. And these three are One. RSV And the Spirit is the witness, because the Spirit is the truth. RSVCE And the Spirit is the witness, because the Spirit is the truth. TLV For there are three that testify- VOICE So there are three testifying witnesses: WEB For there are three who testify: WE There are three in heaven who prove it is true. They are the Father, the Word, and the Holy Spirit. These three are one. WYC For three be, that give witnessing in heaven, the Father, the Son, and the Holy Ghost [For three be, that bear witness in heaven, the Father, the Word, or Son, and the Holy Ghost]; and these three be one. YLT because three are who are testifying [in the heaven, the Father, the Word, and the Holy Spirit, and these -- the three -- are one
I totally agree with the general drift of your message. But someone who has not studied Would think that the king james bible is the only good word for word translation. It is one of the best but it is not the only one that is a word for word from the original. Also, what we call the king james translation is actually the updated version. The original version still contains the Apocryphal books from the Catholic Bible. The ASV is also a great translation.
He keeps saying that the KJV is the word of God. But which KJV. The KJV carried today is, in fact, the 1769 Blayney revision. There are 2 editions of that, one Oxford and one Cambridge. Not counting the apocrypha, they differ in approximately 10% from the 1611 edition. No one today actually uses the 1611 edition. The thick gothic text is virtually unreadable and contains the apocrypha. What's funny (if it wasn't so serious) is that most of the arguments against the modern versions was actually used against the KJV when it first came out. It wasn't until the Blayney revision in 1769 that the KJV became the dominant Bible translation. Please, do your own research, don't just parrot and then waterdown what Ruckman, Gipp, Riplinger and others have said. Sure, there are many modern translations that I don't recommend (mostly dynamic equivalent and paraphrase). But there are some translations that I can and do recommend (NASB, NKJV, LSB, ESV). They are accurate, faithful, reliable translations of the Bible.
So how confident are you in the ability of the scribes to accurately copied every single one of God's Word, considering Textus Receptus is based on fewer and later manuscripts? Earlier and numerous manuscripts had been discovered ever since then, allowing for better textual criticism.
The Chineese now have a translation. Where Jesus tells the men thatwho has not sinned can throw the first stone. The men left. Jesus told the woman that He was also a sinner, then he himself stoned the woman.
Where is this? Is it in California? I don't think so😮. You guys need to start a Church plant in the San Francisco Bay Area (East Bay) in or near Hayward.. I am about 3 blocks from a Catholic Church... That's not an option for me.. Lol🤪💟
He did a great job here. I appreciated the examples given. I would like to hear why the Greek texts used by more recent translators (everyone after 1608) are inferior to Textus Receptus.
I went to my first Bible Fellowship at age 26. I knew nothing but Catholicism. I also didn't even realize that the Catholics have their own Bible with different books in it and different wording for the verses. I was asked if I had a Bible, and I said no. They told me that it would be best to get a King James version and they gave me the reasons why. I was taught that if there are italics it shows you where the text was changed from the original manuscript. The most accurate translation that we have it makes sense that I would want to read it. When you realize the thousands of verses that were pull pulled out or rewritten, now can you see the little bit of Leaven creeping in? Sometimes I wonder how anyone gets saved anymore. But God!
8:25 And the English language hasn't changed at all during the last 400 years? Get real! The KJV is not the best Bible (nor is it the worse) for people today.
Really happy with my 1977 version, like you explain in minute 13, of my Staten vertaling (like KJV, but in Dutch). They did a good job by changjng the difficult words. But!!! It is not in print anymore because of the new Herziene Statenvertaljng.... (like your NKJ) Money, money, money... they need te sell new 'stuff' every decade!
Just want to say this trojan horse series was absolutely amazing!! Thanks Pastor Cucuzza
Yes!! I am hoping he also addresses the mess of New Age crap!!
Amen brother Dave
Amen brother!
This series was eye opening! I was blessed by these teachings! Thank you!! I never understood the KJV argument until recently. When other Bible translations started adding “ repent of your sins” when it’s not actually in the Bible that’s when I had to take the KJV argument seriously. We’re talking about our eternity here people.
Excellent teaching Fantastic.
Thank you,
Dr. Thomas M Cucuzza
Thank you Dr. Cucuzza! Your faithful preaching is a blessing
The more I studied the KJV the more I discovered that it’s extremely flawed having used Latin rather than Greek along side the notations that were used to add to the Bible.
The NASB is far superior for a literal word for word translation.
Furthermore, I don’t believe that God would limit His word to a select group of English speaking people but here we are saying otherwise seeing how the KJV was only written in English. Not fair to all the other languages on the planet.
Read a Bible you can clearly understand. What’s the point otherwise?
KJ had an issue with the already written English translations that presently existed. He had ulterior motives behind having it re-translated.
And lastly, the language is outdated and that’s why the ones that are being published aren’t the original language used.
Thank you for the sanity here!
I think you have misconstrued what this man is saying. There are King James-only people who claim that the KJV is now officially the only inspired Bible for the world, but this man does not appear to be one of them. He's addressing English Bibles only, not what might be the best translation in other languages. You are putting into his mouth things which he did not say or imply.
Did you see at the beginning of his presentation that he said it is OK to have or use other Bibles and that he wants to point out a few things?
Agreed! The NASB1995 is superior, hands down!
Thank you.
G. Riplinger New Age Bible Versions - updated edition 2022
Wow!!!
Vids too here on the tube
You lost me when you judged others as being "whackos." Either say why you think they're wrong, or say nothing. You've damaged your own testimony here.
You lost me when you showed that you put priority in emotions over factual truth.
Spot on critical information! Love u brother:-)
I heard of Westcott and Hort from a pastor I love at temple Baptist church in Knoxville Tn. He said the same thing you are teaching. He is a wonderful fire and brimstone preacher that looks exactly like the preacher I grew up listening to. He is wonderful and you should contact him. I’m 78 years old and I’m thankful to be able to get so many Bible teachers and preachers. As just a simple Bible teacher died in 2023. Les Feldick and I have studied under him for over 30 years.
I’m hoping that The Lord calls me home soon.
If you want the truth about Wescott and Hort Mark Ward just put out a video not defending but not putting down just stating verifiable facts on the truth about what they believed
Charles Lawson is that preacher. Solid Bible Teaching. To God Be the Glory.
Studying these interpretations really has me thinking deeper into Gods word. Thank you for sharing this message
In the first 3 videos of this series this church has skyrocketed to the top of my list of favorite churches. Oh how I wish I had a church like this locally. God bless your ministry from the bottom of my heart!
Excellent. Thank you. I am a KJV believer. I'm so grateful the LORD got me onto the KJV. I have listened to and read other things about this issue and you have made it so much easier to understand. May the LORD bless you, your family and your ministry.
Another problem with English translations is that each one has to avoid similarities to the others in order to avoid copyright laws! That has driven considerable departures!
Amen it’s a big deal!! “For I testify unto every man that heareth the words of the prophecy of this book, If any man shall add unto these things, God shall add unto him the plagues that are written in this book:
19 And if any man shall take away from the words of the book of this prophecy, God shall take away his part out of the book of life, and out of the holy city, and from the things which are written in this book.”
I have talked to pastor Tom about this personally... I am guilty of doing this.. when I was texting someone I intentionally changed the words of the verse when texting someone I was young and stupid and in a time of anger and not sound mind. but pastor Tom helped me understand that if I've believed in Jesus then I'm forgiven. I was in torment over this for over a year.. believing God took my part out of the book of life but I confessed it and repented of it.
@@jordanc1910 Bless your heart. Grace is *such* a difficult, if not impossible concept for us humans to grasp! I'm still trying to grasp it - usually can't - and so I've moved into the sphere of, doesn't matter if I "get it", I'm taking it-I receive Your grace! Thanks, Lord!!!
@@jessstone7486
Can you not know you are saved?
Jesus said his yoke is easy, and his burden is light. The simplicity of the gospel is that you come to Jesus in faith, and he fills you with his Spirit, translating you into his kingdom; clothing you with his righteousness; freeing you from sin, Death, and God's wrath. You become a new creature. You are his.
The person who has his name removed from the Book of Life is one who dies without Christ.
Praise Jesus I’ve been patiently waiting for this!! KJV AMEN!!!! God bless you richly! I’m SO INCREDIBLY GRATEFUL FOR YOU DEAR BROTHER AND PASTOR!
What about Erasmus and his part of Revalation? I really want to know.
Westcott & Hort practically scrubbed the NT of God’s promises to Israel, aligning it with Augustine’s idea that the church is the new or spiritual Israel (Roman Catholicism).
One obvious example is Gal 2:7 -
KJV: “but contrariwise, when they saw that the gospel OF the uncircumcision was committed unto me, as the gospel OF the circumcision was unto Peter;”
All modern versions change both of these “of”s to “to.”
The gospel (good news) of the circumcision: Messiah is here to be our promised King, to restore Israel, to judge the nations, and establish His kingdom on earth (see Psalms, prophets).
The gospel of the uncircumcision: Paul’s gospel. God is doing something completely new. NOW, ALL people can have eternal life, through faith alone, apart from Law, apart from Israel.
I couldn't agree more. From my understanding one of the main problems is with two of the texts that went into the corrupt critical text, namely the codices Vaticanus and Sinaiaticus. These two texts came out of Alexandria in Egypt, a centre of Gnosticism. There is good reason to believe the texts were not considered reliable by the early Christians, and they certainly were not considered good enough to be extemplars for copying from. Give me the Authorised Version any time.
Newer Bible versions have copyrights. Money making opportunities for the publishers and translators! Copyright licenses make money.
Stand before the Throne of Grace and plead the Blood of Jesus and obtain mercy to help in time of need!
33:17 is a fantastic comment on this entire issue. Satan desires to change the what God has said. We are warned that He does this subtlety.
So many people don't know this, maybe because it takes too much effort to look into this truth, but people will be people and laziness is one of our biggest enemies. KJV was born out of the most intellectual era's in the history of time (1694-1778) One of the translators was FLUENT IN 38 DIFFERENT LANGUAGES and the LEAST FLUENT HAD 8 DIFFERENT LANUAGES, and English, Hebrew, Greek & Aramaic was a must. How many people can you find today that even come close to the least of the translators of the KJV. Great point "casting doubt"- ''hath God said?" PREACH IT Ptr Tom!!
fluent in 38 languages and you believe that?
Superb sermon. Thanks so much for this solid teaching.
Thank you for this message a much needed teaching.
Amen and excellent teaching!
Where does the new King James version fall in this discussion?
Thank you Pastor for this message.
The modern translations I've seen really push a works salvation
Which ones?
Amen! One scripture that jumped out at me was in Revelation where John said "I stand in the shore" paraphrasing and the NIV says "the Dragon is who stood on the shore" 🙄🙄🙄 tossed NIV. Yes KJV is harder to understand for me... but I would understand less if what is right....
@Freedom Fighter Chick -- A hint to easier understand the KJB: YE always means you and is singular... Thee and Thou are always plural. That helped me a LOT and truly, the Holy Spirit WILL lead you to all truth, so pray before you read.. You'll learn the KJB quickly, and it is worth it as you have God's PURE and UNCHANGED word! God bless!!
@@TheMistysFavs
Actually, "ye" means you and it's PLURAL, vs "thou", which is you SINGULAR! When the King James Bible says "ye", it's talking to a group of people, not one person, vs "thou" when it's talking to one person!!
WOW!!!! eye opening. Thank you pastor Tom and Northland.
Whatever couldn't be brought over due to the language difference, the King James makes up for and you actually get stuff in the King James that you won't get in the Greek and Hebrew.
Which is good or bad?
Look at Ez 33:13-20 re the idea that righteous people that go back into sin , it says to they will die. What is your answer to this? Did it change from old to new Testament because of Christ? Ron Mostyn
That passage is talking about the judgement God was about to bring on Israel for they their wickedness as a nation. When it says death there it is not talking about heaven vs hell. It's talking about there physical death. God was basically saying that if the righteous turned to sin he would not spare their life but on the other hand if the wicked turned to righteousness he would spare their lives. He was basically telling everyone that had one last chance to survive the impleading judgment about to be brought unto Israel.
I'm not King James Only rather Masoretic/Majority Text Only, the manuscript basis of the KJV and in my personal Bible study, it is the version I primarily use. It is safe and I do find it generally easier to read and memorize particular verses compared to other translations. I reject any version that is predicated on the Critical Text as the vast bulk of modern versions are and this message by Pastor Tom is a well reasoned and presented rebuttal against such.
I want to see this presentation about the NIV being corrupt for the ESV being corrupt.
Very informative thank you Pastor Concuzza!!!
@38:10 well did they have anything else to compare it to?
Excellent series! Thank you.
When I told my mom that the NLT should be brought to the bathroom and used for .....you know. She said I had the spirit of Satan. Hahaha!!!
KJV only for this fella!
👍👍👊
I'm not fond of that particular translation, but I wouldn't say that either, bc it still says a lot of what God intended. The same message can be spoken in many different ways. It is not a great translation for word for word accuracy, but that doesn't mean it doesn't contain some of God's words, that is, the messages which He intended. The NLT contains within its pages the true Gospel, which is faith in Jesus Christ. So anyone outright saying the NLT should be used as toilet paper is also saying that the Gospel itself should be used as toilet paper 🧻 . Think about that. So I think out of respect for the Gospel and out of our fear of God, and the many messages that are conveyed correctly within the NLT, which are God's messages we should not say such things. Yes, the NLT is not a great translation, but it does contain much of God's words/messages
Therefore the NLT still has God's fingerprint. The Gospel message is still intact. I have respect for these things. I think you do too if you're seeing what I'm saying clearly
A translation is just a tool to help us understand God's message more clearly. Some of these "tools" have been dinged up pretty badly, but I am still seeing much of God's truth coming through, so i want to handle these tools with respect and delicacy. In some cases, within some smaller passages some of the newer translations (tools) actually convey the message a little more clearly than the KJV, even though the KJV "tool" is in overall better condition. I think God intended it this way to show that His word is above translations, to keep His people from idolatry. This is one of the reasons why I recommend reading other translations alongside the KJV while checking the closest the the original greek/hebrew/Aramaic and above all asking for discernment from the Holy Spirit.
God's word is not a translation. It is not the KJV. God's word transcends translations, but it can be found within many translations. It is sacred. It is Holy. Remember this
@@Liam0408
Go back and re-read your own comment.
It is filled with compromise and half truth statements....
"It still has a lot of what God intended."?
"It's not a great translation for word for word accuracy, but that doesn't mean it doesn't contain 'some' of God's words."?
You're justifying yourself way too much by your personal subjective reasoning.
The word of God is infallible and inerrant word for word.
By your statement, you already contradicted yourself, and obviously didn't even realize it.
Psalms 12:6-7.
6The words of the LORD are pure words: as silver tried in a furnace of earth, purified seven times.
7Thou shalt keep them, O LORD, thou shalt preserve them from this generation for ever.
Versions do matter and I love my KJV, but if people only have those false versions, God can use those bibles to get people saved until they are exposed to the truth that those versions are not accurate.
I know that there are many English bible translations out there , does anyone know about the Greens literal translation also known as the King James three , it is supposed to have been based on the same manuscript as the King James version, is that true?
Turn to 1John 5:7-8 and see if you have a true Bible or a demonic bible. The demon bible leaves out the Trinity verses.
Amen, amen, amen! This is an excellent series!
So much truth packed into this one hour sermon. THANK YOU for preaching on this!
What about people who don’t speak English?
I need part one of this Trojan horses series, how can I get it?
th-cam.com/play/PL2B4ebzvFXJCBDSZLwrAnP7pV2v-NaFSU.html
This looks extremely good! Just subscribed!!
What about the Hebrew and Greek?
Plus, they did not believe in the true Word of God: "Ya hath God said." Even if I spoke 27 languages, including Hebrew and Greek, I still would not translate God's word. The people who translated the critical text, including Westtcot and Hort, did not believe in the deity of Jesus Christ nor the power of salvation, and even the first 3 chapters of Genesis are not honest.
Also the docs - 3part series…
A Lamp in the Dark,
Tares Among the Wheat,
Bridge to Babylon.
Great series!
You will see just where all of these corrupt bible versions came from!
What about the Latin Vulgate ,it has been around a thousand years longer than the KJV?
He's only talking about what he thinks is the best English translation of the Bible. The Vulgate is not an English translation.
Exactly...just one of the straw men he uses...
The Old Testament and New Testament were never written in Latin. The Latin Vulagte is Catholic. Doth thou believe the Catholic Church is the real Church or of the Devil?
Note: The version of the NASB you used for 1 John 3:9 must be older. My translation says "No one who has been born of God practices sin, because His seed remains in him; and he cannot sin continually, because he has been born of God." Note the added "continually".
This further supports your point that, these versions change and update over time which often deduct from the true meaning.. The seed is our new nature which cannot sin because it is of God.. This verse is not talking about our fleshly nature which does continue to sin as you mentioned.
You must be using the 2020 edition of the NASB. The 95 edition of the NASB doesn't have "continually". There is contention with the 2020 edition of the NASB. It leans towards the liberal side of things. When it was released, conservatives and a lot of people who were long-time uses of the 95 NASB were not happy with the changes. The true heir to the 95 NASB is the LSB (Legacy Standard Bible). I would recommend that over the 2020 NASB.
I’ve never heard some of this. I absolutely thought the purpose of a modern translation was to match the language of the present. Which version of the KJV is perfect? Was it 1612, 1613, 1616, 1629, 1638, or 1769? Or was the 1611, the end to all, translations? At what point in history are we to stop?
Yes the goal of some of these translates is to hopefully provide a more understandable translation. However, not all translations are equal for a number of reasons.
1) They need to start with the correct text stream or original manuscripts. There are alternate manuscripts which are corrupt or modified and can't be trusted. So the first thing you need to do when choosing a Bible is make sure it's from the correct text stream (Textus Receptus).
2) Secondly you should strive to use a Bible translation that is a word for word translation. Part of the issue with some translations is the translators put their own ideas and thoughts into the translation and misrepresent topics. Which end up causing people to believe the wrong thing. Some even go so far as to purposefully manipulate passages to fit their ideas. Things such as removing or changing words to make it look like Jesus Christ was only human and is not God. Changing salvation verses to make it look like you need to earn your way to heaven and so on.
The KJV is not perfect nor infallible but it's pretty close and probably one of the best word for word translations out there. Pastor is not saying that you must only use the KJV. He's just explaining why he uses it and what to watch out for if you plan to use other translations.
If I don't have a perfect translation I will need to constantly BUY ANOTHER ONE. I've personally seen on more than one occasion how Satan can use just a single word to affect someone's belief about Christ deity and the gospel. I know it matters which version you use. I was saved with the KJV back in 1977 and I think I'll just stick with that until I leave this earthly tabernacle and go on to heaven.
You mentioned something regarding once saved, always saved.... Please clarify, thanks
Check out Pastor's series on Secure Forever. th-cam.com/play/PL2B4ebzvFXJBwGATeq_upumS2KbKYbPFY.html
One question, and I’m not trying to mock anyone, but I also have an ESV MacArthur Study Bible, a Dr. Charles F Stanley Life Principles Bible, and other Bibles. I want nothing to do with John MacArthur any more, I don’t want to sell misinformation to someone else, but I also don’t want to throw any of them in the garbage, because they are SUPPOSED to be the word of God.
That said, I’m in kind of a rut. Suggestions, please!
If those Bible translations would cause a lost person to be lead astray on the Gospel or cause a believer to be led astray about their faith then I would toss them out (shred them even). I think God cares more about the accuracy of his Word. The physical book it self should not be worshiped but rather the truth it beholds. If the book does not contain all of God's truth then it's not his Word but rather man's word.
@@jjsmoley Amen and excellent response!!
I tossed my NKJV MacArthur bible away. Its ink and paper not his literal word and I didn't want to give it to someone else.
I have enjoyed the sermon on Calvinism and also the one on Lordship Salvation and to a certain extent the one on Corrupt Bible Translations, however I will have to mostly disagree with you on the KJV which has misled many to misinterpretation. For instance when it says when shall be the sign of thy coming and of the end of the world, many believe this has to do with the destruction of the planet, but it's not talking about the kosmos but the completion of the age, which had to do with the end of old covenant Israel. If it wasn't for the Greek- English Interlinear I would be lost in my interpretation and be led astray into a completely different scenario.
Thank you Pastor much needed message. Maybe one day God will lead you to prepare another message on the parable of the ten virgins five were wise and 5 were foolish Mt 25:.
We need more teaching on the pet verses of lordship advocates. Sadly neglected. It’s fine to proclaim the truth of the obvious verses that prove eternal security, but there are several that the LS camp have a field day with.
I have used the NKJV for many years after seeing how my NIV was corrupted . Some try defend NIV saying if we use its earliest versions it is ok and that through time it became more corrupted. While this is true, now I understand how its roots were from the wrong foundation as the pastor explains here. I compare my NKJV with KJV and it seems to hold to the truth of God’s word with only less ‘ these and thous’. Please correct me if I have missed something here. Thank you
This was the best of the series on Trojan Horses in the Church Today, hopefully there will be future additions to this series. He is saying exactly what I have been seeing going on in the church for 30 years. It all leads back to Rome.
Thanks, That's well worth hearing.
My understanding is the NASB was created by Calvinists.
So...would you need the kjv 1611 version...? What is that about?
No, you would use the Modern King James Bible, which is usually the 7th edition (1769) of the 7th Modern English Bible (Tyndale, Coverdale, Matthew, Great, Geneva, Bishop's, King James/Authorised) of the 7th Language of the Scriptures (Hebrew, Aramaic, Greek, Syriac, Old Latin, German, Modern English).
There are some idioms that are figures of speech that are translated differently in English vs Spanish, for example, "God forbid," is rendered in our Spanish Reina Valera as "De ninguna manera," which means "May it never be." Also, some things that are masculine in English are feminine in Spanish, example, the Word of God is "la Palabra de Dios". Just letting you know that that's the way it is because I myself do translations from English to Spanish and vice versa.
When we wanna say, "My name is Alma," in Spanish, the way we talk it is, "Me llamo Alma," and not "Mi nombre es Alma." A good translation is one that if you read it, it sounds like the way people talk in that language, and not something that would come out of Google translate that it sounds weird. I am against all those new modern false Bible versions, too! God bless you.
I’m all for having the EXACT Translation! But when I was Born Again, I was reading and NIV Bible in my back bedroom, I told Jesus idk if your real but I wanna know. I read Genesis and really did like he said, seek him with ALL of my heart. And that’s when my eyes were opened! I thought I went crazy lol I could see the truth! And that was reading NIV…. So idk where I stand with all these translations.
NIV is a very good translation. It's a valid opinion to say the KJV is "better", but the NIV is 99% identical in meaning and is still the "Word of God" as closely as we can get it in English. What matters is that you hear what God is saying and follow it, He will lead you the rest of the way. If you ever find a translation difference between versions that bothers you, go and seek advice from a wise elder and stay focused on the parts that you are still certain of.
@@destinycoach5 NKJV is not good either. I would go with KJV anyway even though the language may be hard to understand ask the holy spirit for understanding and you can look up the archaic words in a dictionary.
You start by saying a translation can be contradictory to the "word of God". Then I soon hear what you think the "word of God" is. It's nice to settleth on a standard, but is it really that easy? Tradition aside, looking objectively, have you examined all the manuscripts used to create the KJ translation? (or any of the other translations?) Have you scrutinized all the manuscripts that were available to the KJ translators and understood why they may have preferred some over others? Was their judgment always the best? Have additional manuscripts that were not available or not used 400 years ago shown problems with the KJV? Aside from dogmatism, how can you worry about present translational contradictions until you understand and resolve all manuscript inconsistencies, variations, and contradictions? Even rejecting manuscripts outside the Masoretic/Textus Receptus streams doesn't resolve the problem of variant readings nor remove the need of human translators to apply their judgements of best source and best word choice.
This book may help answer some of your question.
www.amazon.com/Unbroken-Bible-Incredible-History-Accuracy/dp/0998480479/ref=sr_1_1?qid=1701739687&refinements=p_27%3ADr.+Phil+Stringer&s=books&sr=1-1
Firm foundation! Not confusion!
If we can’t save ourselves how do we have the power to reverse.
Here is a good illustration of removing the jot and the tittle. What do you read or get out of this sentence? GODISNOWHERE. ? You can either get..... God is now here. Or you may read it as God is no where ! That is why we do not change the word of GOD!
When I saw that the NIV says are being saved implying salvation is a process whereas the KJV says are saved implying an event I now know that the KJV is the English translation for me!!! Should be for everyone!!!
Soooo...which version of the King James should we be reading since they all don't say the same thing and even contradict each other in spots
Eclectic translation sounds a lot to me like trying to manufacture the missing link.
Though I use the KJV, it is not without flaws itself. One major flaw is found in Acts 12:4 where the word 'pascha' is translated 'Easter'. That verse should read 'Passover', as it is written that Christ became our Passover (1 Cor 5:7).
As a result, the whole Christian world has referred to the day in which we remember Christ resurrected as 'Easter' which it is not. Easter, from wherever it's roots comes from (which is another discussion), is not in scripture.
When we celebrate the resurrection we should be referring to it as Passover for Christ was the Passover lamb slain. I do not mean what is known today as the Jewish Passover (that is another issue).
There is no way that this is even a mistranslation for in no language can pascha be translated as Easter, therefore this must be a deliberate attack on the sacred text, no doubt by a scribe back in the day of King James.
If we are not supposed to fool around with the text then this should be taken seriously and we should repent and correct our error.
I followed you regarding Calvinism because i have studied it. When you got to the bible translation dispute on the the KJV, you showed your lack of language skill in translation - by your own admission! You would serve your church better if you were better prepared in both English grammer and Hebrew and Greek. KJV translators had problems with getting their greek version from Erasmus’s work. Check it out. Erasmus was not finished with his work when he delivered it to the KJV translators.
They used the Stephanus edition.
New bible (per)versions are based on different manuscripts. The alexandrian ones. They are corrupted.
They used Biza and Stephanus too. Plus they had dozens of manuscripts from Old Latin (not Latin Vulgate), Syriac Peshitta, which are of older tradition, etc ... To say they only used Greek is pretty dumb
People will argue against the KJV because they still REJECT JESUS CHRIST; and the KJV is all about the deity of Jesus Christ. “ . “ Strait is the gate, and Narrow is the way”...”few there be that find it”.
I like the KJV and read it often, but be careful with that. Other translations may be flawed, but many of them still illustrate the deity of Jesus Christ quite clearly. Do not conflate reading the KJV translation with faith in Jesus Christ. There are plenty of people who are saved that do not read the KJV. Don't let pride cloud your judgement. Plenty of translations present the diety of Jesus and the plan for salvation quite clearly despite their flaws. The Gospel is still the Gospel, even if it is contained in an inferior translation. We are saved through faith in Jesus Christ alone, not faith in Christ *plus* KJV onlyism. Anytime anything is added to the Gospel, it is a false Gospel. The pastor himself has mentioned this quite often
@@Liam0408 Let's be clear, the preacher just explained it is not just about the KJV but about the original text (Masoretic or Textus Receptus), if other versions uses the right manuscript that is what is most important.
New World Order Bible Versions corrupt God's written word.
@@ToOpen6seven I see, may I ask which other Bible follow the right manuscript, thank you :)
AMEN thank you Pastor ✝️
You are not studied in the problems of the textus receptus or how Erasmus completed his work early using the Latin vulgate. Please do a better job of preparation.
Ok, so I'm saved but still sin but confession of my sins is unnecessary because of eternal security??
Confession of sins is for the believer and is necessary for restoring your fellowship with God. There's a distinction between your relationship and fellowship with God.
When you accept the payment Jesus Christ made on the cross for your sins then all of your sins are forgiven and you obtain eternal life. You are born into the family of God as one of his children. This creates a relationship between you and God. A relationship that can never be broken (just like when humans give birth to children). Therefore you can know you are going to heaven no matter what you do.
1 John 5:13 - These things have I written unto you that believe on the name of the Son of God; that ye may know that ye have eternal life, and that ye may believe on the name of the Son of God.
However, if a believer sins he breaks his fellowship with God. You are no longer walking with God and in order to restore your fellowship you need to confess to God your sin. Confession means to agree with God. You agree with God that what you did was wrong and you see it as he does. He will then forgive you of that sin in order to restore fellowship. However, during all of this you never lost your relationship, you are still his child and you will still be going to heaven.
1 John 1:9 - If we confess our sins, he is faithful and just to forgive us our sins, and to cleanse us from all unrighteousness.
Pastor has a series on 1 John explaining this further. th-cam.com/play/PL2B4ebzvFXJDujskMdfehbmnbAC6wC86K.html
Thanks! Was totally unaware of such a distinction. Restored fellowship, interesting. This helps me alot.
Jesus is the Word. He watches over His Word to perform it!
Amazing series. It sometimes feels as if people that believe the Bible are on an island all by themselves
What about the New KJV?
Stick with the KJV, the nkjv isn't good.
I would like to know this, too.
@@InterFinumRerumplease say why. I have one and i thought its safe....
@@InterFinumRerumwhy? Examples?
@beautifulbuds The NKJV also includes some "Critical text" readings, even though they claim it is only based on the Textus Receptus. But it is not only that. There are many issues to long to mention. The KJV was translated by the best scholars the world has ever put together. There won't ever be another translation in English that matches up
1 John 5:7 a foundational trinity verse. (below source is biblegateway)
KJ21
For there are three that bear record in Heaven: the Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost; and these three are one.
ASV
And it is the Spirit that beareth witness, because the Spirit is the truth.
AMP
For there are three witnesses:
AMPC
So there are three witnesses in heaven: the Father, the Word and the Holy Spirit, and these three are One;
BRG
For there are three that bear record in heaven, the Father, the Word , and the Holy Ghost: and these three are one.
CSB
For there are three that testify:
CEB
The three are testifying-
CJB
There are three witnesses -
CEV
In fact, there are three who tell about it.
DARBY
For they that bear witness are three:
DLNT
Because the ones testifying are three:
DRA
And there are three who give testimony in heaven, the Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost. And these three are one.
ERV
So there are three witnesses that tell us about Jesus:
EHV
In fact, there are three that testify:
ESV
For there are three that testify:
ESVUK
For there are three that testify:
EXB
·So [or For] there are three ·witnesses [who testify/bear witness]:
GNV
For there are three, which bear record in heaven, the Father, the Word, and the holy Ghost: and these three are one.
GW
There are three witnesses:
GNT
There are three witnesses:
HCSB
For there are three that testify:
ICB
So there are three witnesses:
ISV
For there are three witnesses in heaven-the Father, the Word, and the Holy Spirit, and these three are one.
PHILLIPS
Jesus Christ himself is the one who came by water and by blood-not by the water only, but by the water and the blood. The Spirit bears witness to this, for the Spirit is the truth. The witness therefore is a triple one-the Spirit in our own hearts, the signs of the water of baptism and the blood of atonement-and they all say the same thing. If we are prepared to accept human testimony, God’s own testimony concerning his own Son is surely infinitely more valuable. The man who really believes in the Son of God will find God’s testimony in his own heart. The man who will not believe God is making him out to be a liar, because he is deliberately refusing to accept the testimony that God has given concerning his own Son. This is, that God has given men eternal life and this real life is to be found only in his Son. It follows naturally that any man who has genuine contact with Christ has this life; and if he has not, then he does not possess this life at all.
JUB
For there are three that bear witness in heaven, the Father, the Word, and the Holy Spirit; and these three are one.
KJV
For there are three that bear record in heaven, the Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost: and these three are one.
AKJV
For there are three that bear record in heaven, the Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost: and these three are one.
LEB
For there are three that testify,
TLB
And we know he is, because God said so with a voice from heaven when Jesus was baptized, and again as he was facing death-yes, not only at his baptism but also as he faced death.* And the Holy Spirit, forever truthful, says it too. So we have these three witnesses: the voice of the Holy Spirit in our hearts, the voice from heaven at Christ’s baptism, and the voice before he died.* And they all say the same thing: that Jesus Christ is the Son of God.*
MSG
Jesus-the Divine Christ! He experienced a life-giving birth and a death-killing death. Not only birth from the womb, but baptismal birth of his ministry and sacrificial death. And all the while the Spirit is confirming the truth, the reality of God’s presence at Jesus’ baptism and crucifixion, bringing those occasions alive for us. A triple testimony: the Spirit, the Baptism, the Crucifixion. And the three in perfect agreement.
MEV
There are three who testify in heaven: the Father, the Word, and the Holy Spirit, and the three are one.
MOUNCE
For there are three that testify:
NOG
There are three witnesses:
NABRE
So there are three that testify,
NASB
For there are three that testify:
NASB1995
For there are three that testify:
NCB
Thus, there are three witnesses,
NCV
So there are three witnesses:
NET
For there are three that testify,
NIRV
There are three that are witnesses about Jesus.
NIV
For there are three that testify:
NIVUK
For there are three that testify:
NKJV
For there are three that bear witness in heaven: the Father, the Word, and the Holy Spirit; and these three are one.
NLV
There are three Who speak of this in heaven: the Father and the Word and the Holy Spirit. These three are one.
NLT
So we have these three witnesses-
NMB
(For there are three that bear witness in heaven: the Father, the word, and the Holy Spirit; and these three are one.)
NRSV
There are three that testify:
NRSVA
There are three that testify:
NRSVACE
There are three that testify:
NRSVCE
There are three that testify:
NTE
There are three that bear witness, you see,
OJB
Because there are shloshah giving solemn eidus:
TPT
So we have these three constant witnesses giving their evidence:
RGT
For there are Three Who bear record in Heaven: the Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost. And these three are One.
RSV
And the Spirit is the witness, because the Spirit is the truth.
RSVCE
And the Spirit is the witness, because the Spirit is the truth.
TLV
For there are three that testify-
VOICE
So there are three testifying witnesses:
WEB
For there are three who testify:
WE
There are three in heaven who prove it is true. They are the Father, the Word, and the Holy Spirit. These three are one.
WYC
For three be, that give witnessing in heaven, the Father, the Son, and the Holy Ghost [For three be, that bear witness in heaven, the Father, the Word, or Son, and the Holy Ghost]; and these three be one.
YLT
because three are who are testifying [in the heaven, the Father, the Word, and the Holy Spirit, and these -- the three -- are one
Many KJV translators lost their fortunes and reputations because of their faithful work!
I totally agree with the general drift of your message. But someone who has not studied Would think that the king james bible is the only good word for word translation. It is one of the best but it is not the only one that is a word for word from the original. Also, what we call the king james translation is actually the updated version. The original version still contains the Apocryphal books from the Catholic Bible. The ASV is also a great translation.
Galations 1:8-9 KJV
The Hymn: How firm a foundation… faith in His excellent Word…look it up in an old hymn book!
He keeps saying that the KJV is the word of God. But which KJV. The KJV carried today is, in fact, the 1769 Blayney revision. There are 2 editions of that, one Oxford and one Cambridge. Not counting the apocrypha, they differ in approximately 10% from the 1611 edition. No one today actually uses the 1611 edition. The thick gothic text is virtually unreadable and contains the apocrypha. What's funny (if it wasn't so serious) is that most of the arguments against the modern versions was actually used against the KJV when it first came out. It wasn't until the Blayney revision in 1769 that the KJV became the dominant Bible translation. Please, do your own research, don't just parrot and then waterdown what Ruckman, Gipp, Riplinger and others have said. Sure, there are many modern translations that I don't recommend (mostly dynamic equivalent and paraphrase). But there are some translations that I can and do recommend (NASB, NKJV, LSB, ESV). They are accurate, faithful, reliable translations of the Bible.
I agree. I myself like the ESV.
I agree my go to texts are KJV and ESV.
Could you please compare 1 Corinthians 1:18, 6:11, 15:1-4. And throw away your ESV's? See how subtle Satan is?
So how confident are you in the ability of the scribes to accurately copied every single one of God's Word, considering Textus Receptus is based on fewer and later manuscripts? Earlier and numerous manuscripts had been discovered ever since then, allowing for better textual criticism.
The Chineese now have a translation. Where Jesus tells the men thatwho has not sinned can throw the first stone. The men left. Jesus told the woman that He was also a sinner, then he himself stoned the woman.
The other nations had the Bible in there languages.
Prepare to be offended and draw your sword... The NIV very often is more precise than the KJV!
Read 'the ecclesiastical text' by Theodore Letis to gain a grasp of the issue.
Where is this? Is it in California? I don't think so😮. You guys need to start a Church plant in the San Francisco Bay Area (East Bay) in or near Hayward..
I am about 3 blocks from a Catholic Church... That's not an option for me..
Lol🤪💟
He did a great job here. I appreciated the examples given. I would like to hear why the Greek texts used by more recent translators (everyone after 1608) are inferior to Textus Receptus.
Ssarch up Dr Ruckman Manuscript Evidence
Sometimes versus are left entirely out.
I think our GOD for Bible teachers such as Thomas A. NBA
In Germany that is written in German , the Martin Luther King Bible is the German equivalent of the KJV .
Only bible I use is KJV 1611 Cambridge edition. No red letters all the bible is truth . But it must be rightly divided.
I went to my first Bible Fellowship at age 26. I knew nothing but Catholicism. I also didn't even realize that the Catholics have their own Bible with different books in it and different wording for the verses. I was asked if I had a Bible, and I said no. They told me that it would be best to get a King James version and they gave me the reasons why. I was taught that if there are italics it shows you where the text was changed from the original manuscript. The most accurate translation that we have it makes sense that I would want to read it. When you realize the thousands of verses that were pull pulled out or rewritten, now can you see the little bit of Leaven creeping in? Sometimes I wonder how anyone gets saved anymore. But God!
Amen! Thank you.
8:25 And the English language hasn't changed at all during the last 400 years? Get real! The KJV is not the best Bible (nor is it the worse) for people today.
Kjv all the way.
Nkjv?
Really happy with my 1977 version, like you explain in minute 13, of my Staten vertaling (like KJV, but in Dutch).
They did a good job by changjng the difficult words. But!!! It is not in print anymore because of the new Herziene Statenvertaljng.... (like your NKJ) Money, money, money... they need te sell new 'stuff' every decade!