You'll want to check out these two videos as well: th-cam.com/video/gZVA6mQ7Huk/w-d-xo.html about the Bondage of the Word, and this one th-cam.com/video/dPG8v_F1Up4/w-d-xo.html about Bible Publishers. See any ads? TH-cam sometimes shows them, but they are outside our control. This channel will never be monetized, and you can also watch here ad-free: lets.church/channel/sellingjesus . Read our position on ads at sellingjesus.org/articles/ads
Thank you for bringing attention to this issue, Andrew. I feel it is very important for the global church to have access to free high quality resources
In speaking of his research methods, in some of Dr. Michael Heiser's videos that I've watched, I recall him referencing how he had access to various scholarly books and documents that were available to him as an academic, but which are unavailable to us as ordinary citizens, _even if we wanted to purchase them!_ He clearly had wished that this would change so that we _all_ could have access to them for our own Biblical studies.
Yes I agree. Ministry should be supposed not sold. This why I support Open source solutions. Especially when it comes to media. I recommend the creative commons Licence. Which acknowledges the original work owner and prohibits anyone making money on it but it free to use etc.
In my opinion, if an organization is accepting donations or public (government) money, any attempts to restrict the work output (no matter the age of the work) is morally questionable. Scripture should be free, manuscript data should be free. If organizations lack the money to do the work and release it for free, then the church should probably be helping fund the work for the sake of the whole church. Where Andrew and I might disagree, is that some helpful work for the church is only really enabled under a commercial model. Would accordance and logos (for example) even exist today without a commercial model. I wish these products were free, and perhaps some of them might be a little excessively priced, but I am not sure if a "everything free" model works.
That's a great point with commercial software like Logos/Accordance. I'd like to frame it this way: they are well supported right now with their sales yes? What if people instead of having a reciprocal relationship and paying for it instead donated to them? There's some ministries that make buko bucks in donations, purchases are a small % of their income. Logos and Accordance could potentially have MORE money and yet also let people who cannot afford it be freely able to access the software. But also if not, why not rely on God to provide and keep your service to the church afloat? Isn't obedience greater than success?
@@classicrockonly That is the problem with lack of transparency. We don't know what profit logos and accordance have from their products. On one hand, software often costs more than people expect, but on the other hand it one does suspect that at least one of these two companies has a significant profit margin. Perhaps for the type of companies that would never have existed without some form of commercial element should be run as a non-profit organization with more open transparency. (Although depending on the country, I am not really sure the rules around non profits create the kind of transparency needed, to solve the problem of greed, but its a start I guess) A perfect example of this problem is the Bibleworks. Bibleworks had a dedicated user base that apparently loved the product and it was still not successful in the long run. Although, I don't believe we know if it was shut down because it was not financially viable or perhaps of there was a commercially motivated behind the scenes commercial motivation to shut it down.
@@jay.rhoden Yeah who knows with Bibleworks. I actually know people still using it. The problem is because it was proprietary software, nobody can pick up the mantle and continue with it. I'm sure that could be a different story. But also, what happens if/when Logos/Accordance goes bunk?People invested thousands of $$ into the platform and it will all just go belly up, onto the next platform that you have to put that money into all over again. If the software was developed by Christians, for Christians, and without profit in mind, I could see a Logos alternative that was FOSS and competitive. But the reality is, it can't exist today because of copyrights in books and bibles
None of my KJV issues have an enforcable copyright. The mention of ancient text is a little ambiguous. I take it that you are talking about the Alexandrian critical manuscripts? Such as the Siniaticus / Vaticanus? *(edit typo)
The KJV is protected by royal prerogative rather than copyright. Royal prerogative predates copyright. Copyright merely supersedes royal prerogative. The KJV's royal prerogative remains protected under s.171(1)(b) of the UK's Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988.
@20:12 "We are not like many, [acting like merchants] peddling God’s word [shortchanging and adulterating God’s message]; but from pure [uncompromised] motives, as [commissioned and sent] from God, we speak [His message] in Christ in the sight of God," 2 Corinthians 2:17 Amplified. Jesus said, "Freely you have received, Freely give," Matthew 10:8.
What leskaighin said. The ancient Hebrew, Aramaic, and Greek manuscripts aren't copyrightable, but people have been allowed to copyright translations of them. I think the NKJV people will sue you if you write a book that quotes more than 500 verses of that translation, but there are public domain translations available now too. There's the World English Bible (abbreviated WEB on Bible Hub) and there's also the Catholic Public Domain Version. These are for if you're interested in extensively quoting biblical text without getting sued, and you don't want to quote a translation that uses archaic language.
Yes! God gave me the strength to do this recently. I realized there are so many things that are widely debated. This isn’t debated but I feel in the OT Gen2:18-20 Eve being the “helper” isn’t the best wording as it lowers her status subconsciously for most people. She is of equal worth to God. It should have been something to show the woman was there to compliment him or maybe someone equally yolked. Keep up your great work. You have started something that will continue on and bless so many people! Proverbs 14:15 "The simple believe anything, but the prudent give thought to their steps." “These were more noble than those in Thessalonica, in that they received the word with all readiness of mind, and searched the scriptures daily, whether those things were so.” Acts 17:11
Perhaps the money changers in the temple where Jesus overturned their tables could be an example also. They thought they were doing a good job of exchanging goods for sacrifice for cash, doves etc. But who were running a business, charging a profit.
More of a doctrine statement / question ... but ... If what is being sold isn't what Jesus teaches. Then is it selling Jesus? Or ... is it selling indulgence(s) in disguise? Psalm 119:136, and Psalm 119:155 sad what's out there.
Asking for $$ in exchange for ministry was the sign of a false teacher, so, it would fit your question well :) it wouldn't be selling Jesus, because it would be false, and you would know it's false because they request you pay for it
@classicrockonly The selling of indulgence ... the thing that was around Martin Luther and his 95 thesis. The selling of grace has proven to be much more lucrative, and enables far more sin. Which is very Psalms 119:136, and Psalm 119:155 sad....
@@wadem4955 Indeed. You might say that selling Jesus is worse, because you are selling something spiritual that God has given us freely. Selling indulgences is not selling the sacred, it is selling a lie
@classicrockonly Interesting... In Acts a fella named Simon is told may he perish with his money for thinking he could buy the free gift of GOD ... speaking of The Holy Spirit. A way we know the oil the foolish virgins are to go buy from the dealers is not The Holy Spirit / Ruach Ha'Kodesh... Can't sell Ruach anymore than one can sell Yeshua.
@@wadem4955 You might like the article on the selling Jesus website about simony. In fact, there's a couple videos about that on this channel too if you wanted to listen instead of read
Maybe because it's not in the British Museum... Part of it is in the British Library, but what you're asking is that they allow part of it to be destroyed for carbon-dating purposes. What purpose would that serve? If it's only to prove the Codex isn't a 19th-century forgery as some conspiracists claim, that's already been proven, with the 1975 discovery of parts of the same Codex in a part of St Catherine's Monastery that had been sealed off for centuries.
You'll want to check out these two videos as well: th-cam.com/video/gZVA6mQ7Huk/w-d-xo.html about the Bondage of the Word, and this one th-cam.com/video/dPG8v_F1Up4/w-d-xo.html about Bible Publishers. See any ads? TH-cam sometimes shows them, but they are outside our control. This channel will never be monetized, and you can also watch here ad-free: lets.church/channel/sellingjesus . Read our position on ads at sellingjesus.org/articles/ads
Thank you for bringing attention to this issue, Andrew. I feel it is very important for the global church to have access to free high quality resources
In speaking of his research methods, in some of Dr. Michael Heiser's videos that I've watched, I recall him referencing how he had access to various scholarly books and documents that were available to him as an academic, but which are unavailable to us as ordinary citizens, _even if we wanted to purchase them!_ He clearly had wished that this would change so that we _all_ could have access to them for our own Biblical studies.
Yes I agree. Ministry should be supposed not sold.
This why I support Open source solutions. Especially when it comes to media.
I recommend the creative commons Licence. Which acknowledges the original work owner and prohibits anyone making money on it but it free to use etc.
Wow! Thank you and your family for your labor of love! ❤
God bless you for this
Finally! I always wondered about these things.
I love Dr Bunnings heart for God's word being set free!
It really is wonderful. 🙏🏻✝️❤️
How can any manuscript of the Bible be copyrighted by anyone? And I’m in complete agreement that all Bible teaching should be free.
Thank you.
Well said. Thank you for this.
This is really facinating!
👍👍👍👍👍👍👍
In my opinion, if an organization is accepting donations or public (government) money, any attempts to restrict the work output (no matter the age of the work) is morally questionable. Scripture should be free, manuscript data should be free. If organizations lack the money to do the work and release it for free, then the church should probably be helping fund the work for the sake of the whole church. Where Andrew and I might disagree, is that some helpful work for the church is only really enabled under a commercial model. Would accordance and logos (for example) even exist today without a commercial model. I wish these products were free, and perhaps some of them might be a little excessively priced, but I am not sure if a "everything free" model works.
Christ gave his word for free. It is better to follow God than man.
@@FollowChristNotMan Yes
That's a great point with commercial software like Logos/Accordance. I'd like to frame it this way: they are well supported right now with their sales yes? What if people instead of having a reciprocal relationship and paying for it instead donated to them? There's some ministries that make buko bucks in donations, purchases are a small % of their income. Logos and Accordance could potentially have MORE money and yet also let people who cannot afford it be freely able to access the software. But also if not, why not rely on God to provide and keep your service to the church afloat? Isn't obedience greater than success?
@@classicrockonly That is the problem with lack of transparency. We don't know what profit logos and accordance have from their products. On one hand, software often costs more than people expect, but on the other hand it one does suspect that at least one of these two companies has a significant profit margin. Perhaps for the type of companies that would never have existed without some form of commercial element should be run as a non-profit organization with more open transparency. (Although depending on the country, I am not really sure the rules around non profits create the kind of transparency needed, to solve the problem of greed, but its a start I guess)
A perfect example of this problem is the Bibleworks. Bibleworks had a dedicated user base that apparently loved the product and it was still not successful in the long run. Although, I don't believe we know if it was shut down because it was not financially viable or perhaps of there was a commercially motivated behind the scenes commercial motivation to shut it down.
@@jay.rhoden Yeah who knows with Bibleworks. I actually know people still using it. The problem is because it was proprietary software, nobody can pick up the mantle and continue with it. I'm sure that could be a different story. But also, what happens if/when Logos/Accordance goes bunk?People invested thousands of $$ into the platform and it will all just go belly up, onto the next platform that you have to put that money into all over again. If the software was developed by Christians, for Christians, and without profit in mind, I could see a Logos alternative that was FOSS and competitive. But the reality is, it can't exist today because of copyrights in books and bibles
None of my KJV issues have an enforcable copyright.
The mention of ancient text is a little ambiguous.
I take it that you are talking about the Alexandrian critical manuscripts? Such as the Siniaticus / Vaticanus?
*(edit typo)
The KJV is protected by royal prerogative rather than copyright. Royal prerogative predates copyright. Copyright merely supersedes royal prerogative. The KJV's royal prerogative remains protected under s.171(1)(b) of the UK's Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988.
@20:12 "We are not like many, [acting like merchants] peddling God’s word [shortchanging and adulterating God’s message]; but from pure [uncompromised] motives, as [commissioned and sent] from God, we speak [His message] in Christ in the sight of God," 2 Corinthians 2:17 Amplified. Jesus said, "Freely you have received, Freely give," Matthew 10:8.
Do you all know about Robert Evans' Scripture Songs?
For those who don't, he releases his music for free: www.youtube.com/@ScriptureSongs
So why are nasb95 or nkjv copyright that's what I see in my nasb95 translation,I'm confused
The translation is copyrightable
What leskaighin said. The ancient Hebrew, Aramaic, and Greek manuscripts aren't copyrightable, but people have been allowed to copyright translations of them. I think the NKJV people will sue you if you write a book that quotes more than 500 verses of that translation, but there are public domain translations available now too. There's the World English Bible (abbreviated WEB on Bible Hub) and there's also the Catholic Public Domain Version. These are for if you're interested in extensively quoting biblical text without getting sued, and you don't want to quote a translation that uses archaic language.
@@justinjozokos1699 There is also the BSB now too: bsb.freely.giving/
Imagine how far the gospel would have spread if the apostles charged everyone?
Yes! God gave me the strength to do this recently. I realized there are so many things that are widely debated.
This isn’t debated but I feel in the OT Gen2:18-20 Eve being the “helper” isn’t the best wording as it lowers her status subconsciously for most people. She is of equal worth to God. It should have been something to show the woman was there to compliment him or maybe someone equally yolked.
Keep up your great work. You have started something that will continue on and bless so many people!
Proverbs 14:15 "The simple believe anything, but the prudent give thought to their steps."
“These were more noble than those in Thessalonica, in that they received the word with all readiness of mind, and searched the scriptures daily, whether those things were so.”
Acts 17:11
Perhaps the money changers in the temple where Jesus overturned their tables could be an example also. They thought they were doing a good job of exchanging goods for sacrifice for cash, doves etc. But who were running a business, charging a profit.
More of a doctrine statement / question ... but ...
If what is being sold isn't what Jesus teaches. Then is it selling Jesus? Or ... is it selling indulgence(s) in disguise?
Psalm 119:136, and Psalm 119:155 sad what's out there.
Asking for $$ in exchange for ministry was the sign of a false teacher, so, it would fit your question well :) it wouldn't be selling Jesus, because it would be false, and you would know it's false because they request you pay for it
@classicrockonly The selling of indulgence ... the thing that was around Martin Luther and his 95 thesis.
The selling of grace has proven to be much more lucrative, and enables far more sin. Which is very Psalms 119:136, and Psalm 119:155 sad....
@@wadem4955 Indeed. You might say that selling Jesus is worse, because you are selling something spiritual that God has given us freely. Selling indulgences is not selling the sacred, it is selling a lie
@classicrockonly Interesting...
In Acts a fella named Simon is told may he perish with his money for thinking he could buy the free gift of GOD ... speaking of The Holy Spirit.
A way we know the oil the foolish virgins are to go buy from the dealers is not The Holy Spirit / Ruach Ha'Kodesh...
Can't sell Ruach anymore than one can sell Yeshua.
@@wadem4955 You might like the article on the selling Jesus website about simony. In fact, there's a couple videos about that on this channel too if you wanted to listen instead of read
What do we say about Trump’s Bible?
Why does the British Museum refuse to carbon date Codex Sianaiticus?
Maybe because it's not in the British Museum...
Part of it is in the British Library, but what you're asking is that they allow part of it to be destroyed for carbon-dating purposes. What purpose would that serve? If it's only to prove the Codex isn't a 19th-century forgery as some conspiracists claim, that's already been proven, with the 1975 discovery of parts of the same Codex in a part of St Catherine's Monastery that had been sealed off for centuries.