The Holy Spirit settled the KJV in my heart, long before I knew their was a bible version controversy. God wrote it, without mistake, and settled it in my heart, Thank you my Lord...amen....................................rich........................acoG
I'm using the KJV to make my own version. I've named it, but I don't want anyone getting into it, so the name will be kept secret until I release it. My new version, after it is complete, will have every verse that is corrupted in new versions highlighted. In addition, it will have the bible codes.
Isaiah 45:7, is an interesting verse. 7 I form the light, and create darkness: I make peace, and create evil: I the Lord do all these things. (KJV) 7 I form the light and create darkness, I make peace and create calamity; I, the Lord, do all these things.’ (NKJV) Remember English translations were done by human beings. Research the Hebrew word it has several meanings. It is my opinion the translators chose the wrong word meaning. To me that verse doesn't compute, so everyone should consider some word choices the translators used.
The lord doesn't warn you through people's words, but through their actions. "A bad tree cannot produce good fruit" Idk where this scripture is, but I remember reading it about 3 months ago. God has shown me corrupt people through their actions.
Thanks for this great explanation concerning God's holy Word. Hopefully, TH-cam will not remove it, as it seems to have done with several others that I had saved in the past.
I prayed and asked the Lord to put the correct Bible in my hands...I was lead to the King James. What amazes me is that there are still some who pull individual verses from the KJV out of context to support their false teachings rather than seeking the Lord for discernment.
It’s all the devil doing this. Trying to pull people away from the kjv because it’s Gods true word. He can’t destroy it, so he tampers with it . Man’s opinion doesn’t matter. Man is going back to the dirt. All of this manuscript stuff doesn’t matter. Devil has everyone focused on the wrong thing. Causing confusion. And people acting like they are such scholars. Not that serious. Whatever worked 30, 300 years ago is still working. God didn’t leave his people without a bible that he said he would preserve for over 400 years. That’s foolish. What God says is what matters. Why no one is going to God behooves me. The devil has people so caught up in “understanding” Gods word. He’s blinded their minds and people don’t realize this is spiritual, and the word is our sword against the enemy. They don’t know it’s not all about understanding- which that’s what the Holy Ghost is for anyway, that they forget it’s about the power behind Gods word. The kjv clearly says angels hearken unto the voice of Gods word. So when we speak his word angels move on our behalf , and demons hate the true word. They are tripped up by it, because it thwarts their plans. Even when a demon is being cast out of someone, I notice they tend to use thee, and thus. Why is that? Why don’t they quote the niv or the others? Because even they know the true word. Niv, and all that other crap doesn’t even register with demons. If i say get THEE behind me Satan. They understand the kjv better than we ever will on this side of heaven. Therefore- I don’t need anything except the Bible that the devil is attacking. The one you can hardly find now. The one that’s hidden in my heart, even before I got saved. The one that worked when I quoted when I got saved. The one that ran demons out of the Alzheimer’s nursing home when I read it 23 years ago. The one people lost their lives over to get it printed. The one without the witchcraft symbol like nkjv. The one that gave me peace when I quoted it at night when I could hear what sounded like demons knocking on my window. The one that nobody had a problem with 100 years ago, or even 50 years ago- and worked for our grand and great grandparents, the one that I remember easily even with a bad memory- that’s the one I’ll stick with till I die!
Are you arguing one version over another? Fair enough. We all have our favorites. However, before getting picky about translations, are you following what is written in the Bible? For example, have you been born again? Are you filled with the Holy Spirit? Does He bear witness to you that you are a child of God? If you have not had a personal encounter with Jesus Christ, you are not saved. It doesn't matter what version of the Bible you have - if you do not do what Jesus says to do! You must be born again!
Amen I was saved using an NLT but I became wrestless. I found issues with the NLT and started to investigate all different copies. Amassed a small library but I reviled the king james. I don't know why by only recently I've been brought to gentleman like this who proclaim the King James is the pure word. I had a spiritual attack when I finally decided to truly look into the matter. It was like a massive fit of depression a d angst, but by the grace of God I pulled through and now I'm convicted. One can be saved even without scripture, but the forces are at work manipulating "bibles" today that claim only to be flawed works of man. Who confuse and attack his authority with footnotes offering alternate explanation or the teachings of men in study bibles intermingled with God's word. You don't need the kjv to be saved, but you really aught to be reading it after you are.
I agree with the last comment. I started watching this video which I thought was might be a few years old. Then when he mentioned what was going on with corrupt politicians destroying our constitution, I thought, this video must have just been put together recently, then I looked when it was first published and I was blown away. It was published many years ago but hit the mail on the head both politically and Biblically. Thanks for your insight preacher. I’m inspired more than ever to get back into my strongs and KJV to do a word by word. Excellent teaching!!!
Here's why I only use the KJV Bible: most other versions (i.e. NIV, ASV, ESV, NASB, NKJV, etc.) do not differentiate between love and charity. Rather other versions use the word love where charity is used in the KJV, which causes one to think love and charity are synonymous, which they are not. Love is the foundation. Charity, which is the greatest, derives from love. Love is that we walk after and keep His Commandments (Ten Commandments; TC), which is life everlasting (Jn. 12:50, 2 Jn. 1:6). To keep His Law is the gospel, which is the foundation, which is love. By thinking love and charity are the same it brings one to assume they have love, even if while breaking the TC. It's after we are born again then love (TC) is something He expects of us to walk after and keep, for He knows what the Holy Spirit can do. Charity, which derives from love, is supposed to grow and mature in us, which is does...if we keep His Commandments. Love is not a process, rather it is a choice we make from our own free will. Charity is a process, which derives from love, the keeping of His Law. The reason I only use the KJV Bible is because it makes the distinction between love and charity. God is: the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit, and these Three are one, which is love!!!
I just like the KJV. I love how it makes me feel like I’m living in the Shakespearean era minus the poor healthcare. It also helps me to think deeper about things if that makes sense.
I also think the KJV is superior. It puts things in a way that is much more poetic then the NIV. Straight away it grips you. “ 1 In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth. 2 And the earth was without form, and void; and darkness was upon the face of the deep. And the Spirit of God moved upon the face of the waters.”
@@noodlyappendage6729 Amen. More importantly, KJV avoids the fraudulent saying Sinaiticus. So does nkjv, which is nice to check occasionally when confused by wording. The others are *based* on sinaiticus
One thing among others that has turned me in favor of the KJV is it says in my fathers house there are many mansions. Other translations change mansions to rooms. To me, It downplays what heaven is like.
@clickmeforcovidtruth8168 I'm not trying to be smart, but is Mary really the mother ie did Jesus come from Mary's ovum and carry her DNA or did Mary just carry Jesus? I've never really thought about until I saw your reply, which I already knew. As Jesus was born of a virgin mother or was Mary like a surrogate?
Simply perform a comparison of suspect Scripture using various newer Bible versions placed side by side. Anyone can clearly see that the words have been altered. Usage of words that alter the context or meaning. In some instances the Scriptures have been completely omitted. (People will run too and fro, and knowledge will increase)
What about how the disciples, and even Christ Himself, don’t recite the Psalms word for word, or any other scripture from the prophets or when the Messiah fulfills a prophecy? I feel like this is God reminding us that whatever version we use isn’t important- it’s the fact that we have the understanding of what Gods Word is saying in our heart, and we use that to speak to God, while we are spending time with Him (and having a relationship with one another) in prayer, is the real key.
I’m not a linguist. But I do know languages go through the normal processes of formation, perfection, then degradation. The KJV we use today is the 7th revision of the 1611 that came about in 1756. Most linguist agree that around that time the English language reached its pinnacle. It’s been down hill ever since!! It’s nice to know that while you’re reading Gods word, and learning of his ways, God is teaching you proper English along the way.
This could not have been said better. As a short history that could be understood and then how it applies to everyday life is an amazing thing. With all the confusion in the world today we need to come together on this very open and shut case on which one is God’s words.
It’s all the devil doing this. Trying to pull people away from the kjv because it’s Gods true word. He can’t destroy it, so he tampers with it . Man’s opinion doesn’t matter. Man is going back to the dirt. All of this manuscript stuff doesn’t matter. Devil has everyone focused on the wrong thing. Causing confusion. And people acting like they are such scholars. Not that serious. Whatever worked 30, 300 years ago is still working. God didn’t leave his people without a bible that he said he would preserve for over 400 years. That’s foolish. What God says is what matters. Why no one is going to God behooves me. The devil has people so caught up in “understanding” Gods word. He’s blinded their minds and people don’t realize this is spiritual, and the word is our sword against the enemy. They don’t know it’s not all about understanding- which that’s what the Holy Ghost is for anyway, that they forget it’s about the power behind Gods word. The kjv clearly says angels hearken unto the voice of Gods word. So when we speak his word angels move on our behalf , and demons hate the true word. They are tripped up by it, because it thwarts their plans. Even when a demon is being cast out of someone, I notice they tend to use thee, and thus. Why is that? Why don’t they quote the niv or the others? Because even they know the true word. Niv, and all that other crap doesn’t even register with demons. If i say get THEE behind me Satan. They understand the kjv better than we ever will on this side of heaven. Therefore- I don’t need anything except the Bible that the devil is attacking. The one you can hardly find now. The one that’s hidden in my heart, even before I got saved. The one that worked when I quoted when I got saved. The one that ran demons out of the Alzheimer’s nursing home when I read it 23 years ago. The one people lost their lives over to get it printed. The one without the witchcraft symbol like nkjv. The one that gave me peace when I quoted it at night when I could hear what sounded like demons knocking on my window. The one that nobody had a problem with 100 years ago, or even 50 years ago- and worked for our grand and great grandparents, the one that I remember easily even with a bad memory- that’s the one I’ll stick with till I die!
"I don't only use the King James Bible... I also use concordances, Treasure Scripture Knowledge, and if I need a good laugh, I have the International Version--" got a good laugh out of me. I love my King James Version--God gave it to me as he gave the roll to Ezekiel, and He said Son of Man, eat that thou findest, and in my mouth, it was as honey for sweetness!
Sinaiticus and Vaticanus are 4th Century manuscripts, textus receptus is 8th-10th century. But the kjv was not translated from the textus receptus directly it was translated from already translated bibles such as the geneva and bishops bible. The kjv translators openly admitted that. It's a great bible but not flawless. For example it can heavily mislead a layman on the term "hell". Just by reading the text as it is you would think the grave and the underworld of flames are the same place, they are both mistranslated as hell. There is a major difference between the grave and hades, but the translation is watered down in that sense. But overall is a great translation
Wrong. They compared and diligently revised the previous English translations. But out of the around 50 translators, many of them spoke 7, 8, even 9 languages in one and spoke them all fluently. They actually translated directly out of the Hebrew Bible and for the New Testament Greek text they mainly used the Stephanus Greek text (both 1550 and 1551 editions) and probably even more importantly was Beza’s 1598 Greek-Latin (corrected translation)-Latin vulgate (corrupted text used by the catholic church). Please do your research.
So what Bible is perfect then? Which translation would you say is perfect? There must be one since God promised to preserve his word. If you say there is no perfect bible then you would be saying God did not keep his word, essentially you make Him out to be a liar
Codex Sinaiticus and Vaticanus are not 4th century manuscripts. Codex B appears first in the 14th century. Codex Sinaiticus in the 1800s. We have no idea what their provenance is or their chain of custody. They have *not* been chemically tested because if they were you'd probably have a similar situation to Codex 2427 and they don't want that.
Hello, We think you might find this helpful. www.bing.com/videos/search?q=the+door+king+james+bible&&view=detail&mid=1A247E233B118442D2291A247E233B118442D229&&FORM=VRDGAR&ru=%2Fvideos%2Fsearch%3Fq%3Dthe%2Bdoor%2Bking%2Bjames%2Bbible%26FORM%3DHDRSC3
No Greater Joy Ministries thank you now I have another question. If I have a KJV bible that was published by Thomas Nelson is that ok or should I be reading out of the Cambridge publisher?
Well spoken, easily understood, and when you both hear & read the Truth spoken here & found in the KJV, via Holy Spirit, the Truth does truly set you free! Amen & Thank you!
Man, I really was looking for an answer here but you seemed to just confuse or further cloud my knowledge. I use the KJV but also the NIV, ESV and sometimes ASV. I am able to easily switch between translations to see the KJV to compare and have only found the wording to be clearer. Can you tell me what’s so wrong with this? I’m legitimately asking and hope you’ll explain. Thanks for sharing this regardless, I appreciate gaining knowledge and the effort you put into it.
The moment I became saved God strongly impressed upon me two things: 1) get baptized and 2) get a King James bible. Whenever I've thought I know better than God and deviated from the KJV my walk with God has suffered.
Read the one you can actually understand... Most people find the KJV very difficult to understand. It might as well be written in Greek. Though I admit I often read it parallel with other versions. It's such a traditional version, everyone has a copy.
Why did Jesus Christ send us the Holy Spirit? Do you engage Him while reading the Bible? Why don't you canvass for the translation of Shakespeare's books into modern English? That would water down his ideas right? But you are okay if the Bible, God's word is watered down to make it more "understandable"! It does not make sense to me at all!
@@Allyourbase1990 That's because you read it like a novel. The Bible is a spiritual book and it has just one Author- the Holy Spirit. If you ask Him to give you understanding, He will do just that. Jesus Christ sent Him to us for a reason.
Brother, this is convoluted. Even the myth of Hort and Westcott is continued here. The text used for the ASV was the Kodex Vaticanus (B) and Kodex Sinaiticus (Aleph), both from the 4th century, not a hundred years ago.
As a KJVO guy, this was an acceptable argument. You covered the foundation, but not the evidence. In other words, the milk but not the meat. You should compare the verses to new versions to show how corrupt new versions are.
We have no original manuscripts. What we have are hand-copied copies of copies of copies of copies dating hundreds of years after the seminal works. Differences do not (necessarily) indicate that the new is wrong and the old is right. It only indicates that they are different. The next question needs to be asked. "Why are they different?" Do the two statements rely on different Hebrew/Greek texts? Is one text likely to be closer to what was (presumedly) originally written than the other?
Interesting! Is it then not right to translate thou shalt not kill, into thou shalt not murder?? Since the word for kill used in the kjv was apparently synonymous with murder.
Excellent teaching Michael. Have you done any studies on the Bible of the American Revolution printed by Robert Aitken for the first Continental Congress in 1782. It is a printing of the 1769 version of the KJV? Printed in Philadelphia.
I own the KJV, and The New American standard Bible, since the carnal mind cannot discern the things of God ,must we not rely on God the Holy Spirit for discernment.
Wonderful video! Am a KJV PCE fan myself. Which publisher put out that Bible in your lap? I love the very generous wide margins! Would love to get me one if it's still in print. Thanks!
1 John 5:7 was added by the author of the textus receptus, Erasmus. Added. He added it from the Latin Vulgate and we all know the Latin Vulgate is full of problems. 1 John 5:7 addition by Erasmus is nowhere to be found in the greek manuscript copies. Nowhere. It was added. So all of you KJV-only people....1 John 5:7. Good old 1 John....5......7.
Quoting Peter Ruckman: Here is the evidence for retaining 1 John 5:7-8. In line with God promising to preserve His words (Ps. 12), we have this material which Jimbo slyly “swept under the rug.” a. John Gill says that Fulgentius cited the AV reading in A.D. 510. Do you think he got it from an Irish manuscript written in A.D. 1519? b. Jerome cites the verse from Eustochium A.D. 450, and then puts it into the Vulgate where it is preserved (Ps. 12) for 900 years. c. But Athanasius quotes 1 John 5:7-8 before Jerome was born (A.D. 350). “Irish 1519 manuscript” is it, kiddies? You silly smart-aleck little Twinkies! d. But why stop here? In A.D. 415, at the Council of Carthage, we find the “fathers” cite (in Latin) the text of 1 John 5:7-8 (PATER,VERBUM ET SPIRITUS SANCTUS”). e. But why stop here? “The wealth of information” and “embarrassment of riches” (two Alexandrian hackneyed cliches meaning “no evidence we can quote”), which Jimmy didn’t want you to find, says that Tertullian quoted the King James Version of 1 John, chapter 5 in A.D. 200 (Gill, An Exposition of the New Testament, Vol.2, pp. 907-908). f. That isn’t all. If I had debated Flimsy-Jimmy , I would have pulled Which Bible? on him (by David Otis Fuller) and put pages 211 and 212 before the video camera. You see, the King James translators had four Waldensian Bibles on their writing tables in 1611. These Waldensian Bibles had 1 John 5:7-8 in them. The trouble with Biblical illiterates like Andy Sandlin, Doug Kutilek, James White, F. F. Bruce, Bobby Ross, and John Ankerberg is not just that they have not “done their homework.” No one gave them any homework to do. Their teachers were bankrupt. Watch God Almighty preserving His words, in spite of the negative, critical, destructive work of “godly” Conservative and Evangelical “scholars”: A.D. 170: Old Syriac and Old Latin. A.D. 180: Tatian and Old Syriac. A.D. 200: Tertullian and Old Latin. A.D. 250: Cyprian and Old Latin. A.D. 350: Priscillian and Athanasius. A.D. 415: Council of Carthage. A.D. 450: Jerome’s Vulgate. A.D. 510: Fulgentius. A.D. 750: Wianburgensis. A.D. 1150: Miniscule manuscript 88. A.D. 1200-1500: Four Waldensen Bibles. A.D. 1519: Greek Manuscript 61. A.D. 1520-1611: Erasmus TR. A.D. 1611: King James Authorized Version of the Holy Bible. God had to work a miracle to get the truth of 1 John 5:7-8 preserved; He preserved it. You have it; but not in an RV, RSV, NRSV, CEV, ASV, NASV, or NIV.
So, am I wasting my time reading the International version. When I bounce text from the international to the King James, I find them both similar. I told my Wife when reading KJV, it was kind of hard to decipher at the time, so she got me an international version. Dr. Pearl says if he wants to have a good laugh, he will pick up the International version. I give alot of credence to Pastor Pearl, but am a little confused also.
Shhh don't ask that question or how other countries that have the Bible in their language that wasn't translated from KJV got the real scripture. Actually though, there's several excellent videos by James White that really call out KJV onlyists.
I have to say this is the best explanation on Why the King James? I consider myself a student of Bryan Denlinger and he does not agree with quite a few things you have to say. But I have an open mind. There are some things that I agree with him, that you're not correct on. And there was a lot of things that you have to say I agree with. I just like to thank you for this particular explanation you gave on the King James.
Good video brother. I could never understand why so many who profess faith in Christ can't pass up an opportunity to attack the word of their salvation. It's beyond comprehension that "christians" deny God preserved a perfect bible. They have more faith in scholarship then they do in scripture. How can this be? Textual critics comprise the protestant version of the Catholic magisterium, the group of cardinals that determine what is and isn't God's truth. They are modern Scribes and Pharisees.
I like the KJV, NKJV and the NASB. I wanted to mention what I don't like about the KJV. The KJV does not capitalize the pronouns for God, such as He or Him etc. Here is an example using the KJV compared to the NKJV and NASB: For God so loved the world, that He gave His [a]only begotten Son, that whoever believes in Him shall not perish, but have eternal life. (NASB) For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life. (KJV) For God so loved the world that He gave His only begotten Son, that whoever believes in Him should not perish but have everlasting life. (NKJV) God's Name should always be capitalized, whether using a pronoun or His actual Name. Also, I don't like how the KJV uses the word Holy Ghost for the Holy Spirit. A ghost can only be in one place at one time. God is everywhere. Here are three examples from Matthew 28, the Great Commission: Go ye therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost: 20 Teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you: and, lo, I am with you always, even unto the end of the world. Amen. (KJV) Go [a]therefore and make disciples of all the nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, 20 teaching them to observe all things that I have commanded you; and lo, I am with you always, even to the end of the age.” [b]Amen. (NKJV) Go therefore and make disciples of all the nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit, 20 teaching them to observe all that I commanded you; and lo, I am with you [b]always, even to the end of the age.” (NASB)
One of the owners said he believes he's in trouble with God for helping to make such a corrupted version. If he knew it was going to be corrupt, he wouldn't have participated nor funded it.
Jeremiah 16:19. The church hasn't "aways" used the KJV, since it was published only 500 years ago. The KJV translators used such "words" as "cherubims" and "saraphims," pluralizing plurals. Was this from ignorance of the Hebrew, just as saying, in Gen. 1:5, the "first day" where the Hebrew says "one day"? They got "lucifer" from the Catholic Vulgate, letter-for- letter from the Latin, instead of translating it in Isaiah 14:12, while they DID translate it in Job 11:17 and 2 Peter 1:19. This would appear that they had some agenda to keep in order to make it appear to be a "name." The best thing about the KJV as far as I'm concerned is their use of the Olde English thee, thou, and thy to indicate that a single person is the intended audience and ye, you, and your to indicate addressing multiple persons. Plus, in the O.E., "shall" in the 2nd and 3rd person and "will" in the first person denote a command, whereas "will" in the 2nd and 3rd person and "shall" in the first person denote simply a future event. (Compare 2 Tim. 2:15 and 1 Cor. 6:10.)
Very good question. Why King James only? Seeing there is not one scripture that supports this heresy. Like the Pharisees in the time of Jesus, truth is replaced by a man made traditions.
Kjv is a decent english translation, however it is still only an english translation. The english language at times does no justice to the greek language that they used in the first century.
@WorshipInTruth Sorry to interrupt, where did you obtain the information on how the authorized version became known as the "King Jame's version"? Seems interesting.
Nothing against the King James translation, but this is a wealth of misinformation..... the TR is NOT the Majority Text. In comes from a small stream of the Majority Text. If you take a MT position, you would have to accept roughly 1800 revisions to the KJV and NKJV as they currently stand. The TR is a set of 1500s collations of Greek manuscripts(roughly 25 or so total Greek used) set next to Latin (much of them were diglots with a Latin column and a Greek colum). There are TR readings that are not even found in any extant Greek manuscripts.
Obviously thought throughout scripture as Michael Pearl points out, we notices time and again of copies of copies and the originals are not important elsewise Moses would have been smote for breaking the first ever written Word of God, Jeremiah tosses out words of God into the Euphrates, and earlier in the the Book of Jeremiah a king takes a pen knife and cuts out a few leaves of a book and has them burned. God has provided His Word to many a tongue, if you speak english, then use the KJB.
Saint Jerome was so important to me. Scriptures are inspired. You are so knowledgeable. Ben Franklin said something to the effect that everyone should have the Bible in his house. Thank you. 1 Peter 2:3
The most literal translations are actually NASB, ESV & NKJV. I have been watching many of your videos but am afraid that you are dead wrong on this topic. The KJV is the 4th most literal translation; not the 1st.
He said it right there. The KJV is in that "GREAT TRADITION" of bible text. When you receive or do something on the basis of tradition, you have just lost. Mark 7:5-8 The Pharisees and the scribes asked Him, "Why do Your disciples not walk according to the tradition of the elders, but eat their bread with impure hands?" [6] And He said to them, "Rightly did Isaiah prophesy of you hypocrites, as it is written: 'This PEOPLE HONORS ME WITH THEIR LIPS, BUT THEIR HEART IS FAR AWAY FROM ME. [7] 'But IN VAIN DO THEY WORSHIP ME, TEACHING AS DOCTRINES THE PRECEPTS OF MEN.' [8] Neglecting the commandment of God, you hold to the tradition of men."
KJV says "Thou shall not kill...". Clearly an incorrect translation, which other manuscripts have correctly translated to "murder". Not criticizing the KJV, per se... It is an excellent translation... My bigger point is that it was not translated by divinely inspired men, or it would be without error, which it is not...
The KJV has many errors in it and many many versions. I do use it mostly but remember the scripture referred to in the Bible was written in Hebrew, not Greek, Latin, English, Pinoy or any other language. You will get the most accurate in Hebrew. KJV with study tools is very good but you can't assume it is without flaws.
Believe on Christ to be saved. Ephesians 2:8-9 " For by grace are ye saved through faith, not of yourselves it is the gift of God. Not of works lest any man should boast." A life where you don't believe in Christ is meaningless. Jesus has died just for you no matter what you have done/will do. Believe on Him to be saved.
Yes, it’s a great idea to give new Christians a bible, a dictionary, a concordance and a bunch of other stuff. You may as well give them it in Chinese. Plus, King James was such a honorable man. I’m fairly sure that Hebrew and Greek as well as Latin were here before the King Jim .........not the original. Not to mention, language evolves......King James is great and beautiful once you kinda get the hang of it but will only confuse and frustrate most new Christians.......I wonder if the King James has any scriptures about legalism?
Where does confusion come from? If you have any problem with the Scripture in King James version, just ask the Holy Spirit for understanding. The Bible is not an ordinary book. Why have you not canvassed for the translation of Shakespeare's books into 'contemporary English? The reason people like you give for new Bible translations is rooted in the mind of satan. He is the only one smiling to the bank over the issue. The more translations we have, the more Scripture is watered down to make it more "understandable".
Thank you for your question. We apologize for the delay in getting back to you. Mike has dealt with some of the questions regarding the King James Bible on The Door channel. th-cam.com/video/qAilfG-IFQg/w-d-xo.html
Proverbs chapter five is a chapter warning against the perils of adultery and unchastity, and encourages purity and faithfulness to one wife. The New King James, New American Standard, NIV and other modern translations translate this chapter correctly . The King James Version does not. I will use the New King James version to show the correct translation of Proverbs 5:16, and include the previous verse and the two succeding verses to demonstrate how this translation is entirely in context with the flow and meaning of the chapter. The NASB and NIV translate it virtually the same. "15: Drink water from your own cistern, And running water from your own well. 16: Should your fountains be dispersed abroad, streams of water in the streets? 17: Let them be only your own, And not for strangers with you. 18: Let your fountain be blessed, and rejoice with the wife of your youth." Here verse sixteen is translated correctly as a rhetorical question, and is entirely in context with the rest of the chapter: "SHOULD your fountains be dispersed abroad . . .?" and the response is obviously no, however the King James Version translates verse sixteen as a declarative statement, not as a rhetorical question by using the word "Let" instead of "Should" at the beginning of the verse. This would make it a prescription for promiscuity and profligacy, not chastity: "Let your fountains be dispersed abroad . . .". This cannot be the correct meaning of the verse, and the newer translations have the translation correct. The second error in the King James Version (KJV), the New King James version (NKJV) and some other versions is in 2 Samuel 15:7, but this is not a universal error in all translations. After Absalom killed his brother Amnon and was plotting against his father David, it states in these versions that Absalom dwelt in his house for forty years before the open rebellion: "Now it came to pass after forty years." This is not possible, as this would take up the entirety of David's remaining reign, and in fact the remainder of his life, and leave no room for the rest of the recorded events in his life after Absalom was slain. The Syriac Peshitta version, along with some modern versions such as the NIV translate this verse correctly as being only four years, relying on different manuscripts i.e. the Syriac/Aramaic for the Peshitta, and variations in the Septuagint for the NIV. By the way, I am not a fan of the NIV, but in this instance it is more accurate than the King James.
Fountains is a reference to offspring. Let you children be many. Disperse them abroad. As in be fruitful and multiply. Let them (thine offspring) be thine own and not a strangers. So have many children but only with your wife.
I personally enjoy the CJB .......It opens up the Scripture in a whole new light. Jesus our Lord was Hebrew, and to understand Scripture from the Hebraic view, is very amazing, and incredible. CJB is Complete Jewish Bible
I've always used a King James Bible. When I hear the NIV read it's like a different language to me. With that said, I can see where Cyrus Scofield and/or his team changed words/wording in their King James when compared to older KJV to promote Scofield's end times theory of futurism. In addition his commentary on Daniel & Revelation is completely butchered but I've learned to work around all this.
I only have two greek Copies of the New Testament but I also have the Septuagint. The KJV has stood the test of time and is By Numbers and Popular Opinion the Best Translation. My personal favorite is the NASB and ESV. The Latin Vulgate and Peshitta seem to match very well to the KJV. Westcott and Hort we're simpletons but that doesn't mean all bible verses depend soly on there work.
One of the owners of the NASB said "There are so many corrupted verses in both the new and the old testament, I did not realize it when we made it. I funded it, I sat with the translators, I oversaw the translation, but all these things I'm seeing, I can no longer say it's a good translation. I believe I'm in trouble with God."
@Yahuwnathan Yes, and for TWO THOUSAND YEARS, around the globe, the church, the body of Christ has proclaimed that verse and HUNDREDS OF MILLIONS were born again and followed Jesus. The NAME they used was not the Judazer one, but Jesus, Iesous and the names translated from that Greek name, WHICH IS THE ONLY NAME IN THE NEW TESTAMENT USED OF CHRIST. Period. If you have evidence FROM AN ACTUAL MANSUSCRIPT, tell us what and where it is please.
@Yahuwnathan You are wrong on many counts and present no actual EVIDENCE. Some early fathers said MATTHEW was originally written and hebrew. That's it. And some believe it was Matthew who ALSO put it into Greek. And God in his Providence wisely saw to it that NO HEBREW mss survivied, but the Greek mss did. Why would God do this if the Hebrew names were so important? The fact is that all we have is GREEK, and in Greek we have Kurios, Theos and Iesous. PERIOD.
I ask God himself and a Holman kjv bible ended up in my hands someone bought it for me I didn't even ask, so GOD himself recommends the KJV Holman what more proof do you need
@Yahuwnathan Erasmus was the most learned scholar of his time, although he remained within the catholic church he was certainly not a pagan idolater or pope worshipper. The byzantine-eastern style manuscripts he used were the proper "majority text" as opposed to the quasi-pagan-gnostic texts created in the occult schools of Alexandria and Rome.
Because my KJV Bible tells me so! When you read the KJV only 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.
But they do not necessarily illustrate the unicorn that you or I would think of. I read those verses and and also read some articles and a lot of people tend to believe a unicorn to be an ox or rhinoceros type animal
The Holy Spirit settled the KJV in my heart, long before I knew their was a bible version controversy. God wrote it, without mistake, and settled it in my heart, Thank you my Lord...amen....................................rich........................acoG
I'm using the KJV to make my own version. I've named it, but I don't want anyone getting into it, so the name will be kept secret until I release it. My new version, after it is complete, will have every verse that is corrupted in new versions highlighted. In addition, it will have the bible codes.
@@clickmeforcovidtruth8168 have you done it? please share
Isaiah 45:7, is an interesting verse.
7 I form the light, and create darkness: I make peace, and create evil: I the Lord do all these things.
(KJV)
7 I form the light and create darkness,
I make peace and create calamity;
I, the Lord, do all these things.’
(NKJV)
Remember English translations were done by human beings. Research the Hebrew word it has several meanings. It is my opinion the translators chose the wrong word meaning.
To me that verse doesn't compute, so everyone should consider some word choices the translators used.
That was 10 years ago and the summary about politics sounded like he was talking about the situation we have today.
Love you brother!!!!!!
I just turned 62. Been studying God's word for 50 plus years.
Rightly divided for 7.
God bless
After seeing others who attended and listening to them persecuting the KJV I realized it was the Lord warning me.
The lord doesn't warn you through people's words, but through their actions. "A bad tree cannot produce good fruit" Idk where this scripture is, but I remember reading it about 3 months ago. God has shown me corrupt people through their actions.
Thanks for this great explanation concerning God's holy Word. Hopefully, TH-cam will not remove it, as it seems to have done with several others that I had saved in the past.
I prayed and asked the Lord to put the correct Bible in my hands...I was lead to the King James. What amazes me is that there are still some who pull individual verses from the KJV out of context to support their false teachings rather than seeking the Lord for discernment.
Pentecostal much?
@@chriscravens8318 Man if you saw BHI you would see what the true "miracle of reinterpretation" looks like
Some pull verses out of context from the KJV to try and justify the false teaching of KJV onlyism.
It’s all the devil doing this. Trying to pull people away from the kjv because it’s Gods true word. He can’t destroy it, so he tampers with it . Man’s opinion doesn’t matter. Man is going back to the dirt. All of this manuscript stuff doesn’t matter. Devil has everyone focused on the wrong thing. Causing confusion. And people acting like they are such scholars. Not that serious. Whatever worked 30, 300 years ago is still working. God didn’t leave his people without a bible that he said he would preserve for over 400 years. That’s foolish. What God says is what matters. Why no one is going to God behooves me. The devil has people so caught up in “understanding” Gods word. He’s blinded their minds and people don’t realize this is spiritual, and the word is our sword against the enemy. They don’t know it’s not all about understanding- which that’s what the Holy Ghost is for anyway, that they forget it’s about the power behind Gods word. The kjv clearly says angels hearken unto the voice of Gods word. So when we speak his word angels move on our behalf , and demons hate the true word. They are tripped up by it, because it thwarts their plans. Even when a demon is being cast out of someone, I notice they tend to use thee, and thus. Why is that? Why don’t they quote the niv or the others? Because even they know the true word. Niv, and all that other crap doesn’t even register with demons. If i say get THEE behind me Satan. They understand the kjv better than we ever will on this side of heaven. Therefore- I don’t need anything except the Bible that the devil is attacking. The one you can hardly find now. The one that’s hidden in my heart, even before I got saved. The one that worked when I quoted when I got saved. The one that ran demons out of the Alzheimer’s nursing home when I read it 23 years ago. The one people lost their lives over to get it printed. The one without the witchcraft symbol like nkjv. The one that gave me peace when I quoted it at night when I could hear what sounded like demons knocking on my window. The one that nobody had a problem with 100 years ago, or even 50 years ago- and worked for our grand and great grandparents, the one that I remember easily even with a bad memory- that’s the one I’ll stick with till I die!
Weird. That is literally the same response LDS use to explain why the Book of Mormon is true.
Are you arguing one version over another? Fair enough. We all have our favorites. However, before getting picky about translations, are you following what is written in the Bible? For example, have you been born again? Are you filled with the Holy Spirit? Does He bear witness to you that you are a child of God?
If you have not had a personal encounter with Jesus Christ, you are not saved. It doesn't matter what version of the Bible you have - if you do not do what Jesus says to do! You must be born again!
Amen, it all comes down to being saved .. a person can be saved by any bible that shows salvation through Christ.
Amen I was saved using an NLT but I became wrestless. I found issues with the NLT and started to investigate all different copies. Amassed a small library but I reviled the king james. I don't know why by only recently I've been brought to gentleman like this who proclaim the King James is the pure word.
I had a spiritual attack when I finally decided to truly look into the matter. It was like a massive fit of depression a d angst, but by the grace of God I pulled through and now I'm convicted.
One can be saved even without scripture, but the forces are at work manipulating "bibles" today that claim only to be flawed works of man. Who confuse and attack his authority with footnotes offering alternate explanation or the teachings of men in study bibles intermingled with God's word.
You don't need the kjv to be saved, but you really aught to be reading it after you are.
I agree with the last comment. I started watching this video which I thought was might be a few years old. Then when he mentioned what was going on with corrupt politicians destroying our constitution, I thought, this video must have just been put together recently, then I looked when it was first published and I was blown away. It was published many years ago but hit the mail on the head both politically and Biblically. Thanks for your insight preacher. I’m inspired more than ever to get back into my strongs and KJV to do a word by word. Excellent teaching!!!
Very good assessment dear Brother, thank you.
Thank You , Have a blessed day !
Feb 2021
Love all your videos
Thank you for your patience & time
Here's why I only use the KJV Bible: most other versions (i.e. NIV, ASV, ESV, NASB, NKJV, etc.) do not differentiate between love and charity. Rather other versions use the word love where charity is used in the KJV, which causes one to think love and charity are synonymous, which they are not. Love is the foundation. Charity, which is the greatest, derives from love. Love is that we walk after and keep His Commandments (Ten Commandments; TC), which is life everlasting (Jn. 12:50, 2 Jn. 1:6). To keep His Law is the gospel, which is the foundation, which is love. By thinking love and charity are the same it brings one to assume they have love, even if while breaking the TC. It's after we are born again then love (TC) is something He expects of us to walk after and keep, for He knows what the Holy Spirit can do.
Charity, which derives from love, is supposed to grow and mature in us, which is does...if we keep His Commandments. Love is not a process, rather it is a choice we make from our own free will. Charity is a process, which derives from love, the keeping of His Law. The reason I only use the KJV Bible is because it makes the distinction between love and charity.
God is: the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit, and these Three are one, which is love!!!
Thank you Doctor Michael Pearl for showing us what is really being taught and some of these Colleges, Seminaries and Universities.
Would like to hear this guy and James White discuss this
I just like the KJV. I love how it makes me feel like I’m living in the Shakespearean era minus the poor healthcare. It also helps me to think deeper about things if that makes sense.
I also think the KJV is superior. It puts things in a way that is much more poetic then the NIV. Straight away it grips you.
“ 1 In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth.
2 And the earth was without form, and void; and darkness was upon the face of the deep. And the Spirit of God moved upon the face of the waters.”
@@noodlyappendage6729 Amen. More importantly, KJV avoids the fraudulent saying Sinaiticus. So does nkjv, which is nice to check occasionally when confused by wording. The others are *based* on sinaiticus
One thing among others that has turned me in favor of the KJV is it says in my fathers house there are many mansions. Other translations change mansions to rooms. To me, It downplays what heaven is like.
I’d take a closet in Heaven but I get what you mean 😂
Is that the worst? The NIV calls Joseph Jesus's father! Do I even need to say how WRONG that is!?
@clickmeforcovidtruth8168
I'm not trying to be smart, but is Mary really the mother ie did Jesus come from Mary's ovum and carry her DNA or did Mary just carry Jesus?
I've never really thought about until I saw your reply, which I already knew. As Jesus was born of a virgin mother or was Mary like a surrogate?
Why do you think Jesus is referring to heaven? Cf John 2v16
Simply perform a comparison of suspect Scripture using various newer Bible versions placed side by side. Anyone can clearly see that the words have been altered. Usage of words that alter the context or meaning. In some instances the Scriptures have been completely omitted. (People will run too and fro, and knowledge will increase)
What about how the disciples, and even Christ Himself, don’t recite the Psalms word for word, or any other scripture from the prophets or when the Messiah fulfills a prophecy? I feel like this is God reminding us that whatever version we use isn’t important- it’s the fact that we have the understanding of what Gods Word is saying in our heart, and we use that to speak to God, while we are spending time with Him (and having a relationship with one another) in prayer, is the real key.
Is there a modern English bible that you suggest to use, I don't speak king james English.
All of us speak king james english. Alot of words and Sayings derrive from the KJV. Its been in use for 300-400 years. This gen has gotten lazy.
I’m not a linguist. But I do know languages go through the normal processes of formation, perfection, then degradation. The KJV we use today is the 7th revision of the 1611 that came about in 1756. Most linguist agree that around that time the English language reached its pinnacle. It’s been down hill ever since!! It’s nice to know that while you’re reading Gods word, and learning of his ways, God is teaching you proper English along the way.
I’m not KJV only. But I definitely am pro Textus Receptus. KJV, NKJV are both based on the TR
This could not have been said better. As a short history that could be understood and then how it applies to everyday life is an amazing thing. With all the confusion in the world today we need to come together on this very open and shut case on which one is God’s words.
It’s all the devil doing this. Trying to pull people away from the kjv because it’s Gods true word. He can’t destroy it, so he tampers with it . Man’s opinion doesn’t matter. Man is going back to the dirt. All of this manuscript stuff doesn’t matter. Devil has everyone focused on the wrong thing. Causing confusion. And people acting like they are such scholars. Not that serious. Whatever worked 30, 300 years ago is still working. God didn’t leave his people without a bible that he said he would preserve for over 400 years. That’s foolish. What God says is what matters. Why no one is going to God behooves me. The devil has people so caught up in “understanding” Gods word. He’s blinded their minds and people don’t realize this is spiritual, and the word is our sword against the enemy. They don’t know it’s not all about understanding- which that’s what the Holy Ghost is for anyway, that they forget it’s about the power behind Gods word. The kjv clearly says angels hearken unto the voice of Gods word. So when we speak his word angels move on our behalf , and demons hate the true word. They are tripped up by it, because it thwarts their plans. Even when a demon is being cast out of someone, I notice they tend to use thee, and thus. Why is that? Why don’t they quote the niv or the others? Because even they know the true word. Niv, and all that other crap doesn’t even register with demons. If i say get THEE behind me Satan. They understand the kjv better than we ever will on this side of heaven. Therefore- I don’t need anything except the Bible that the devil is attacking. The one you can hardly find now. The one that’s hidden in my heart, even before I got saved. The one that worked when I quoted when I got saved. The one that ran demons out of the Alzheimer’s nursing home when I read it 23 years ago. The one people lost their lives over to get it printed. The one without the witchcraft symbol like nkjv. The one that gave me peace when I quoted it at night when I could hear what sounded like demons knocking on my window. The one that nobody had a problem with 100 years ago, or even 50 years ago- and worked for our grand and great grandparents, the one that I remember easily even with a bad memory- that’s the one I’ll stick with till I die!
"I don't only use the King James Bible... I also use concordances, Treasure Scripture Knowledge, and if I need a good laugh, I have the International Version--" got a good laugh out of me. I love my King James Version--God gave it to me as he gave the roll to Ezekiel, and He said Son of Man, eat that thou findest, and in my mouth, it was as honey for sweetness!
That's a legendary quote there
Amen, brother, amen!
Sinaiticus and Vaticanus are 4th Century manuscripts, textus receptus is 8th-10th century. But the kjv was not translated from the textus receptus directly it was translated from already translated bibles such as the geneva and bishops bible. The kjv translators openly admitted that. It's a great bible but not flawless. For example it can heavily mislead a layman on the term "hell". Just by reading the text as it is you would think the grave and the underworld of flames are the same place, they are both mistranslated as hell. There is a major difference between the grave and hades, but the translation is watered down in that sense. But overall is a great translation
Wrong. They compared and diligently revised the previous English translations. But out of the around 50 translators, many of them spoke 7, 8, even 9 languages in one and spoke them all fluently. They actually translated directly out of the Hebrew Bible and for the New Testament Greek text they mainly used the Stephanus Greek text (both 1550 and 1551 editions) and probably even more importantly was Beza’s 1598 Greek-Latin (corrected translation)-Latin vulgate (corrupted text used by the catholic church).
Please do your research.
@@stevenl1706 The Textus Receptus used for the KJV NT has pieces of the Latin Vulgate in it.
So what Bible is perfect then? Which translation would you say is perfect? There must be one since God promised to preserve his word. If you say there is no perfect bible then you would be saying God did not keep his word, essentially you make Him out to be a liar
Codex Sinaiticus and Vaticanus are not 4th century manuscripts. Codex B appears first in the 14th century. Codex Sinaiticus in the 1800s. We have no idea what their provenance is or their chain of custody. They have *not* been chemically tested because if they were you'd probably have a similar situation to Codex 2427 and they don't want that.
AMEN BROTHER MICHAEL! :)
The textus receptus had 3 revisions and the textus receptus and majority text have many many differences.
What about the New King James Bible? Is that a good bible or is it also misleading and should only use the King James Bible as my only bible?
Hello, We think you might find this helpful. www.bing.com/videos/search?q=the+door+king+james+bible&&view=detail&mid=1A247E233B118442D2291A247E233B118442D229&&FORM=VRDGAR&ru=%2Fvideos%2Fsearch%3Fq%3Dthe%2Bdoor%2Bking%2Bjames%2Bbible%26FORM%3DHDRSC3
No Greater Joy Ministries thank you now I have another question. If I have a KJV bible that was published by Thomas Nelson is that ok or should I be reading out of the Cambridge publisher?
Wow. This was almost 10 years ago.
Thank you for this video. 🧡🕊🗽
Well spoken, easily understood, and when you both hear & read the Truth spoken here & found in the KJV, via Holy Spirit, the Truth does truly set you free!
Amen & Thank you!
Man, I really was looking for an answer here but you seemed to just confuse or further cloud my knowledge.
I use the KJV but also the NIV, ESV and sometimes ASV. I am able to easily switch between translations to see the KJV to compare and have only found the wording to be clearer.
Can you tell me what’s so wrong with this? I’m legitimately asking and hope you’ll explain. Thanks for sharing this regardless, I appreciate gaining knowledge and the effort you put into it.
Learn greek
Amen.. Jesus is Lord
Kjv ,I'm so. Blessed to read it
Awesome teaching brother thanks....
The moment I became saved God strongly impressed upon me two things: 1) get baptized and 2) get a King James bible. Whenever I've thought I know better than God and deviated from the KJV my walk with God has suffered.
Read the one you can actually understand... Most people find the KJV very difficult to understand. It might as well be written in Greek. Though I admit I often read it parallel with other versions. It's such a traditional version, everyone has a copy.
I agree. I can barely understand it
@@Allyourbase1990 try UKJV, and U = UPDATED.
Why did Jesus Christ send us the Holy Spirit? Do you engage Him while reading the Bible? Why don't you canvass for the translation of Shakespeare's books into modern English? That would water down his ideas right? But you are okay if the Bible, God's word is watered down to make it more "understandable"! It does not make sense to me at all!
@@Allyourbase1990 That's because you read it like a novel. The Bible is a spiritual book and it has just one Author- the Holy Spirit. If you ask Him to give you understanding, He will do just that. Jesus Christ sent Him to us for a reason.
May god bless you sir
GOD* (not "god") 🙏👍
All Bible will be helpful
Brother, this is convoluted. Even the myth of Hort and Westcott is continued here. The text used for the ASV was the Kodex Vaticanus (B) and Kodex Sinaiticus (Aleph), both from the 4th century, not a hundred years ago.
Spot on explanation. 👏👏👏
Foundational explanation, he didn't compare the translations. It's an OK explanation.
Good stuff. Keep up the good work.
As a KJVO guy, this was an acceptable argument. You covered the foundation, but not the evidence. In other words, the milk but not the meat. You should compare the verses to new versions to show how corrupt new versions are.
We have no original manuscripts. What we have are hand-copied copies of copies of copies of copies dating hundreds of years after the seminal works. Differences do not (necessarily) indicate that the new is wrong and the old is right. It only indicates that they are different. The next question needs to be asked. "Why are they different?" Do the two statements rely on different Hebrew/Greek texts? Is one text likely to be closer to what was (presumedly) originally written than the other?
Interesting! Is it then not right to translate thou shalt not kill, into thou shalt not murder?? Since the word for kill used in the kjv was apparently synonymous with murder.
Excellent teaching Michael. Have you done any studies on the Bible of the American Revolution printed by Robert Aitken for the first Continental Congress in 1782. It is a printing of the 1769 version of the KJV? Printed in Philadelphia.
I own the KJV,
and The New American standard Bible, since the carnal mind cannot discern the things of God ,must we not rely on God the Holy Spirit for discernment.
Wonderful video! Am a KJV PCE fan myself. Which publisher put out that Bible in your lap? I love the very generous wide margins! Would love to get me one if it's still in print. Thanks!
Church Bible publishers prints some really nice Pure Cambridge Editions.
1 John 5:7 was added by the author of the textus receptus, Erasmus. Added. He added it from the Latin Vulgate and we all know the Latin Vulgate is full of problems. 1 John 5:7 addition by Erasmus is nowhere to be found in the greek manuscript copies. Nowhere. It was added. So all of you KJV-only people....1 John 5:7. Good old 1 John....5......7.
Quoting Peter Ruckman:
Here is the evidence for retaining 1 John 5:7-8. In line with God promising to preserve His words (Ps. 12), we have this material which Jimbo slyly “swept under the rug.”
a. John Gill says that Fulgentius cited the AV reading in A.D. 510. Do you think he got it from an Irish manuscript written in A.D. 1519?
b. Jerome cites the verse from Eustochium A.D. 450, and then puts it into the Vulgate where it is preserved (Ps. 12) for 900 years.
c. But Athanasius quotes 1 John 5:7-8 before Jerome was born (A.D. 350). “Irish 1519 manuscript” is it, kiddies? You silly smart-aleck little Twinkies!
d. But why stop here? In A.D. 415, at the Council of Carthage, we find the “fathers” cite (in Latin) the text of 1 John 5:7-8 (PATER,VERBUM ET SPIRITUS SANCTUS”).
e. But why stop here? “The wealth of information” and “embarrassment of riches” (two Alexandrian hackneyed cliches meaning “no evidence we can quote”), which Jimmy didn’t want you to find, says that Tertullian quoted the King James Version of 1 John, chapter 5 in A.D. 200 (Gill, An Exposition of the New Testament, Vol.2, pp. 907-908).
f. That isn’t all. If I had debated Flimsy-Jimmy , I would have pulled Which Bible? on him (by David Otis Fuller) and put pages 211 and 212 before the video camera. You see, the King James translators had four Waldensian Bibles on their writing tables in 1611. These Waldensian Bibles had 1 John 5:7-8 in them. The trouble with Biblical illiterates like Andy Sandlin, Doug Kutilek, James White, F. F. Bruce, Bobby Ross, and John Ankerberg is not just that they have not “done their homework.” No one gave them any homework to do. Their teachers were bankrupt.
Watch God Almighty preserving His words, in spite of the negative, critical, destructive work of “godly” Conservative and Evangelical “scholars”:
A.D. 170: Old Syriac and Old Latin.
A.D. 180: Tatian and Old Syriac.
A.D. 200: Tertullian and Old Latin.
A.D. 250: Cyprian and Old Latin.
A.D. 350: Priscillian and Athanasius.
A.D. 415: Council of Carthage.
A.D. 450: Jerome’s Vulgate.
A.D. 510: Fulgentius.
A.D. 750: Wianburgensis.
A.D. 1150: Miniscule manuscript 88.
A.D. 1200-1500: Four Waldensen Bibles.
A.D. 1519: Greek Manuscript 61.
A.D. 1520-1611: Erasmus TR.
A.D. 1611: King James Authorized Version of the Holy Bible.
God had to work a miracle to get the truth of 1 John 5:7-8 preserved; He preserved it. You have it; but not in an RV, RSV, NRSV, CEV, ASV, NASV, or NIV.
Love This! 👍🙏💗
So, am I wasting my time reading the International version. When I bounce text from the international to the King James, I find them both similar. I told my Wife when reading KJV, it was kind of hard to decipher at the time, so she got me an international version. Dr. Pearl says if he wants to have a good laugh, he will pick up the International version. I give alot of credence to Pastor Pearl, but am a little confused also.
Look up Acts 8:37 in your KJV, then in your NIV. The difference will be crystal clear.
What about before 1611?
Shhh don't ask that question or how other countries that have the Bible in their language that wasn't translated from KJV got the real scripture. Actually though, there's several excellent videos by James White that really call out KJV onlyists.
I have to say this is the best explanation on
Why the King James?
I consider myself a student of Bryan Denlinger and he does not agree with quite a few things you have to say.
But I have an open mind.
There are some things that I agree with him, that you're not correct on.
And there was a lot of things that you have to say I agree with.
I just like to thank you for this particular explanation you gave on the King James.
Why are you a disciple of a mere man? Are you called to feed on man or the Holy Spirit? I'm shocked that you can even say this in public.
Where is the best place to get a kJB? Which one do you have?
Good video brother. I could never understand why so many who profess faith in Christ can't pass up an opportunity to attack the word of their salvation. It's beyond comprehension that "christians" deny God preserved a perfect bible. They have more faith in scholarship then they do in scripture. How can this be? Textual critics comprise the protestant version of the Catholic magisterium, the group of cardinals that determine what is and isn't God's truth. They are modern Scribes and Pharisees.
I like the KJV, NKJV and the NASB. I wanted to mention what I don't like about the KJV. The KJV does not capitalize the pronouns for God, such as He or Him etc. Here is an example using the KJV compared to the NKJV and NASB:
For God so loved the world, that He gave His [a]only begotten Son, that whoever believes in Him shall not perish, but have eternal life. (NASB)
For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life. (KJV)
For God so loved the world that He gave His only begotten Son, that whoever believes in Him should not perish but have everlasting life. (NKJV)
God's Name should always be capitalized, whether using a pronoun or His actual Name. Also, I don't like how the KJV uses the word Holy Ghost for the Holy Spirit. A ghost can only be in one place at one time. God is everywhere. Here are three examples from Matthew 28, the Great Commission:
Go ye therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost:
20 Teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you: and, lo, I am with you always, even unto the end of the world. Amen. (KJV)
Go [a]therefore and make disciples of all the nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, 20 teaching them to observe all things that I have commanded you; and lo, I am with you always, even to the end of the age.” [b]Amen. (NKJV)
Go therefore and make disciples of all the nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit, 20 teaching them to observe all that I commanded you; and lo, I am with you [b]always, even to the end of the age.” (NASB)
One of the owners said he believes he's in trouble with God for helping to make such a corrupted version. If he knew it was going to be corrupt, he wouldn't have participated nor funded it.
Jeremiah 16:19. The church hasn't "aways" used the KJV, since it was published only 500 years ago.
The KJV translators used such "words" as "cherubims" and "saraphims," pluralizing plurals. Was this from ignorance of the Hebrew, just as saying, in Gen. 1:5, the "first day" where the Hebrew says "one day"?
They got "lucifer" from the Catholic Vulgate, letter-for- letter from the Latin, instead of translating it in Isaiah 14:12, while they DID translate it in Job 11:17 and 2 Peter 1:19. This would appear that they had some agenda to keep in order to make it appear to be a "name."
The best thing about the KJV as far as I'm concerned is their use of the Olde English thee, thou, and thy to indicate that a single person is the intended audience and ye, you, and your to indicate addressing multiple persons. Plus, in the O.E., "shall" in the 2nd and 3rd person and "will" in the first person denote a command, whereas "will" in the 2nd and 3rd person and "shall" in the first person denote simply a future event. (Compare 2 Tim. 2:15 and 1 Cor. 6:10.)
Very good question. Why King James only? Seeing there is not one scripture that supports this heresy. Like the Pharisees in the time of Jesus, truth is replaced by a man made traditions.
Believe in Jesus Christ and be saved from hell before it’s eternally too late if you haven’t already… Merry Christmas
i believe in the king james version bible!
What are your comments on the Old Schofield Bible? Or other suggestions
Kjv is a decent english translation, however it is still only an english translation. The english language at times does no justice to the greek language that they used in the first century.
One need only read the preface of the 1611 from the translators ; and they faced the same accusations then as anyone not idolizing the KJV
@WorshipInTruth Sorry to interrupt, where did you obtain the information on how the authorized version became known as the "King Jame's version"? Seems interesting.
Amen
@Yahuwnathan Paul quotes from Joel as well and there we are informed that the name of the Lord we are to call upon is Jesus Christ!
Is the Eth Cepber a good translation
RSV and NRSV are very good tools as well
So what about people who don't speak English? When I lived in Belgium, their Bible was in French.
There translations of the Textus Receptus in other languages.
You look younger? Thanks. God bless you.😇
NASB the most literal version.
Nothing against the King James translation, but this is a wealth of misinformation..... the TR is NOT the Majority Text. In comes from a small stream of the Majority Text. If you take a MT position, you would have to accept roughly 1800 revisions to the KJV and NKJV as they currently stand. The TR is a set of 1500s collations of Greek manuscripts(roughly 25 or so total Greek used) set next to Latin (much of them were diglots with a Latin column and a Greek colum). There are TR readings that are not even found in any extant Greek manuscripts.
Obviously thought throughout scripture as Michael Pearl points out, we notices time and again of copies of copies and the originals are not important elsewise Moses would have been smote for breaking the first ever written Word of God, Jeremiah tosses out words of God into the Euphrates, and earlier in the the Book of Jeremiah a king takes a pen knife and cuts out a few leaves of a book and has them burned. God has provided His Word to many a tongue, if you speak english, then use the KJB.
God bless you friend
Kjv!
Saint Jerome was so important to me. Scriptures are inspired. You are so knowledgeable. Ben Franklin said something to the effect that everyone should have the Bible in his house. Thank you. 1 Peter 2:3
The most literal translations are actually NASB, ESV & NKJV. I have been watching many of your videos but am afraid that you are dead wrong on this topic. The KJV is the 4th most literal translation; not the 1st.
If they all read differently how is that Gods word?
Years ago I was going to go to Moody but the Lord told not to and why,but later I thought it was the devil misleading me
He said it right there. The KJV is in that "GREAT TRADITION" of bible text. When you receive or do something on the basis of tradition, you have just lost. Mark 7:5-8
The Pharisees and the scribes asked Him, "Why do Your disciples not walk according to the tradition of the elders, but eat their bread with impure hands?" [6] And He said to them, "Rightly did Isaiah prophesy of you hypocrites, as it is written: 'This PEOPLE HONORS ME WITH THEIR LIPS, BUT THEIR HEART IS FAR AWAY FROM ME. [7] 'But IN VAIN DO THEY WORSHIP ME, TEACHING AS DOCTRINES THE PRECEPTS OF MEN.' [8] Neglecting the commandment of God, you hold to the tradition of men."
What about the nkjv?
KJV says "Thou shall not kill...". Clearly an incorrect translation, which other manuscripts have correctly translated to "murder". Not criticizing the KJV, per se... It is an excellent translation... My bigger point is that it was not translated by divinely inspired men, or it would be without error, which it is not...
What about the New King James Bible?
Hello, you may find this literature helpful in answering your question. nogreaterjoy.org/shop/which-version-is-the-bible
The KJV has many errors in it and many many versions. I do use it mostly but remember the scripture referred to in the Bible was written in Hebrew, not Greek, Latin, English, Pinoy or any other language. You will get the most accurate in Hebrew. KJV with study tools is very good but you can't assume it is without flaws.
The NT scripture was never written in Hebrew, and God's preservation of scripture is as divine as inspiration.
The "Bible" was Greek. The Torah (old testament) was Hebrew. And the Greek was written by people who were Hebrew that had learned Greek.
Is ESV still okay to read ?
Hello, We think you might find this helpful. nogreaterjoy.org/shop/why-the-king-james-bible-is-the-perfect-word-of-god-book
Need to understand it through Yeshua's culture, He told the samaritan woman that salvation is from the Jews.
Believe on Christ to be saved. Ephesians 2:8-9 " For by grace are ye saved through faith, not of yourselves it is the gift of God. Not of works lest any man should boast." A life where you don't believe in Christ is meaningless. Jesus has died just for you no matter what you have done/will do. Believe on Him to be saved.
Yes, it’s a great idea to give new Christians a bible, a dictionary, a concordance and a bunch of other stuff. You may as well give them it in Chinese. Plus, King James was such a honorable man. I’m fairly sure that Hebrew and Greek as well as Latin were here before the King Jim .........not the original. Not to mention, language evolves......King James is great and beautiful once you kinda get the hang of it but will only confuse and frustrate most new Christians.......I wonder if the King James has any scriptures about legalism?
Where does confusion come from? If you have any problem with the Scripture in King James version, just ask the Holy Spirit for understanding. The Bible is not an ordinary book. Why have you not canvassed for the translation of Shakespeare's books into 'contemporary English? The reason people like you give for new Bible translations is rooted in the mind of satan. He is the only one smiling to the bank over the issue. The more translations we have, the more Scripture is watered down to make it more "understandable".
Which KJV is correct, the cambridge or the Oxford? They are different but both KJV. If KJV is perfect which one is it?
Thank you for your question. We apologize for the delay in getting back to you. Mike has dealt with some of the questions regarding the King James Bible on The Door channel. th-cam.com/video/qAilfG-IFQg/w-d-xo.html
47 Translators and Scholars were used to produce the original 1611 KJV Bible.
Proverbs chapter five is a chapter warning against the perils of adultery and unchastity, and encourages purity and faithfulness to one wife. The New King James, New American Standard, NIV and other modern translations translate this chapter correctly . The King James Version does not.
I will use the New King James version to show the correct translation of Proverbs 5:16, and include the previous verse and the two succeding verses to demonstrate how this translation is entirely in context with the flow and meaning of the chapter. The NASB and NIV translate it virtually the same.
"15: Drink water from your own cistern, And running water from your own well. 16: Should your fountains be dispersed abroad, streams of water in the streets? 17: Let them be only your own, And not for strangers with you. 18: Let your fountain be blessed, and rejoice with the wife of your youth."
Here verse sixteen is translated correctly as a rhetorical question, and is entirely in context with the rest of the chapter: "SHOULD your fountains be dispersed abroad . . .?" and the response is obviously no, however the King James Version translates verse sixteen as a declarative statement, not as a rhetorical question by using the word "Let" instead of "Should" at the beginning of the verse. This would make it a prescription for promiscuity and profligacy, not chastity: "Let your fountains be dispersed abroad . . .".
This cannot be the correct meaning of the verse, and the newer translations have the translation correct.
The second error in the King James Version (KJV), the New King James version (NKJV) and some other versions is in 2 Samuel 15:7, but this is not a universal error in all translations.
After Absalom killed his brother Amnon and was plotting against his father David, it states in these versions that Absalom dwelt in his house for forty years before the open rebellion: "Now it came to pass after forty years." This is not possible, as this would take up the entirety of David's remaining reign, and in fact the remainder of his life, and leave no room for the rest of the recorded events in his life after Absalom was slain.
The Syriac Peshitta version, along with some modern versions such as the NIV translate this verse correctly as being only four years, relying on different manuscripts i.e. the Syriac/Aramaic for the Peshitta, and variations in the Septuagint for the NIV.
By the way, I am not a fan of the NIV, but in this instance it is more accurate than the King James.
Fountains is a reference to offspring. Let you children be many. Disperse them abroad. As in be fruitful and multiply. Let them (thine offspring) be thine own and not a strangers. So have many children but only with your wife.
@matchesison it wasn't forbidden for another thousand years or so (under Moses)... before then, marrying siblings was completely safe and allowed.
Preach the Word brother.
I personally enjoy the CJB .......It opens up the Scripture in a whole new light. Jesus our Lord was Hebrew, and to understand Scripture from the Hebraic view, is very amazing, and incredible. CJB is Complete Jewish Bible
I've always used a King James Bible. When I hear the NIV read it's like a different language to me. With that said, I can see where Cyrus Scofield and/or his team changed words/wording in their King James when compared to older KJV to promote Scofield's end times theory of futurism. In addition his commentary on Daniel & Revelation is completely butchered but I've learned to work around all this.
I only have two greek Copies of the New Testament but I also have the Septuagint. The KJV has stood the test of time and is By Numbers and Popular Opinion the Best Translation. My personal favorite is the NASB and ESV. The Latin Vulgate and Peshitta seem to match very well to the KJV. Westcott and Hort we're simpletons but that doesn't mean all bible verses depend soly on there work.
One of the owners of the NASB said "There are so many corrupted verses in both the new and the old testament, I did not realize it when we made it. I funded it, I sat with the translators, I oversaw the translation, but all these things I'm seeing, I can no longer say it's a good translation. I believe I'm in trouble with God."
All modern versions are recommended by the Roman Catholic church! They only HATE the AV 1611! Why?
@Yahuwnathan Yes, and for TWO THOUSAND YEARS, around the globe, the church, the body of Christ has proclaimed that verse and HUNDREDS OF MILLIONS were born again and followed Jesus. The NAME they used was not the Judazer one, but Jesus, Iesous and the names translated from that Greek name, WHICH IS THE ONLY NAME IN THE NEW TESTAMENT USED OF CHRIST. Period. If you have evidence FROM AN ACTUAL MANSUSCRIPT, tell us what and where it is please.
@Yahuwnathan You are wrong on many counts and present no actual EVIDENCE. Some early fathers said MATTHEW was originally written and hebrew. That's it. And some believe it was Matthew who ALSO put it into Greek. And God in his Providence wisely saw to it that NO HEBREW mss survivied, but the Greek mss did. Why would God do this if the Hebrew names were so important? The fact is that all we have is GREEK, and in Greek we have Kurios, Theos and Iesous. PERIOD.
I ask God himself and a Holman kjv bible ended up in my hands someone bought it for me I didn't even ask, so GOD himself recommends the KJV Holman what more proof do you need
Terrific shoutout to the constitution. Private world banks are at the root of modern world change.
@Yahuwnathan Erasmus was the most learned scholar of his time, although he remained within the catholic church he was certainly not a pagan idolater or pope worshipper. The byzantine-eastern style manuscripts he used were the proper "majority text" as opposed to the quasi-pagan-gnostic texts created in the occult schools of Alexandria and Rome.
What time is KJV bible is that he has it has so much room for writing
Because my KJV Bible tells me so! When you read the KJV only 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.
But they do not necessarily illustrate the unicorn that you or I would think of. I read those verses and and also read some articles and a lot of people tend to believe a unicorn to be an ox or rhinoceros type animal
who are the sons of god