Preservation of the words of God that establish the doctrine of God is the important thing in all Bibles. Best thing is to have many Bibles on your desk.

Great video Tim. I agree with you in being TR preferred. I use KJV, MEV and NKJV. Although I am TR preferred, I do recognize that some great Bible teachers use CT Bibles as I believe the Holy Spirit can use anything to teach the Word. Always love your videos, youre down to earth and humble, not arrogant or condescending like other KZreadrs trying to sell their opinions. Keep up the great work!

Thank you, Brother Tim ⭐🌹⭐

Yes, the primary goal of all Bible translation should be to translate the Hebrew and Greek text back into the original King James Version. 😅

@MotoBmx01r

4 ай бұрын

Haha 😄 🤣

Thanks Pastor Tim. Really enjoyed this "change of focus". More please!

Just a few recommendations if anyone wants to dig deeper into all this. 😊 1. A great book on this topic is Scribes and Scripture: The Amazing Story of How We Got the Bible by John Meade and Peter Gurry (PhD, University of Cambridge). It's quite new, it's academically up to date, and it's a pretty short read. 2. Along similar lines, Can We Trust the Gospels? by Peter Williams (PhD, University of Cambridge). Chapter 3 alone is worth the price of the book - it is fantastic, lots of historical details I had never seen, and it really helped me to better appreciate the world of the Gospels, and how much the Gospel writers knew. Williams also happens to be one of the men behind the Tyndale House Greek New Testament which is a superb edition of the Greek NT. 3. And I agree Mark Ward is awesome! His video on Bible typography got me into the aesthetics of Bible reading (and premium Bibles) and his book Authorized is perhaps the best response to the KJV Only movement since Don Carson and James White's books. Ward came out of the KJV Only movement and he's been exceedingly fair and kind to KJV Only. He recently got Maurice Robinson on his channel for an interview on the KJV Only and related issues.

Great video Tim, I am with you on this. I really like the NKJV it is my go to Bible. I have other translations but NKJV is top. I like Majority Text also. I am studying Greek and Hebrew so have Bibles in Greek and Hebrew. The Greek text I have are the TR and the Majority Text and the Byzantine Text. I have been watching the some of Ward's videos after you introduced him to us. Keep up the good work.

Thank you for this! I love the NKJV

Good Tim, totally agreed with you.. thanks for this type of videos.. GOD bless you..

Wonderful video Pastor Tim. Thank you. 😊 Please do more like this - so interesting. I love it when you do these “”different” videos. I have landed where you did. The NKJV is my favourite translation. I also like the NASB 95 or 77 but definitely not the 20. I also like the NLT but I struggled with it a bit, wondering if it was too dynamic and lost accuracy. Then I saw one of your videos where you said you used the NLT almost as a “commentary” just to help with understanding! Bingo!! 😅 I’ve been doing that ever since snd can now enjoy my NLT bible as well. PS looking forward to NLT Sonrise! Keep up the great work.🙏☺️😊

Thank you Tim, much appreciated!!

Thank you,I believe that you are on target!

Like the longer format. So much info passed over in an understandable way. Being new to the word and faith snd not found home church (in 🇬🇧 we have many church's but not a lot of bible) I am lucky to have a few bibles and note subtle differences between them. I love the Douay-Rheims, reads very similar to KJV. I do like my NLT and it reads easy, then I go to study bible ESV or John Macarthur NASB to dig down a bit deeper. I dont know old hebrew, greek,aramaic or Latin so I'm always gonna be going off a of a view of a view. But having a broad reading of the various options of the word. Thank you for getting this type of content out to the world. 👍

This was very interesting, please do make more educational videos like this !

@anickelsworthbiblereviews

4 ай бұрын

Thank you!

Thank you, Brother Tim 🌹⭐🌹

I think this is the best

@anickelsworthbiblereviews

4 ай бұрын

Wow. I really appreciate this comment!

Personally like to main the NKJV but its mostly because that's what my church uses. Also the NASB because of the humble lamb HIStory is so cool looking

Is my translation correct? This question sent me down a road of confusion and frustration, and being a new ignorant Christian it was all the worse. I did not know. Through the process I was very aware not to make this an obsession, but I could not help it at all. Then I received a dear letter from a brother that helped me through it. Who is a scholar in the New Testament. I will never get rid of that letter. I never got my eyes off of Jesus though. I was close though. I learned so much. My point is if you decide to question what you are reading seek out the answers whole heartedly with all humility and with Jesus at the center of it. You will grow immensely.

This was a fantastic video! Very well presented and fair across the spectrum!

The KJV translators did their own textual criticism since they made choices between the texts of Beza, Erasmus, Stephanus, and 5-6 others. They did not leave their reasoning as to why they chose what beyond the notes in the text. It wasn't until Scrivner (1881) who studied the Greek texts and determined the text choices that there was a single text that reflected the KJV. The first Greek text that became known as the TR was Elzevirs' 1633 edition (first printed in 1624) which was basically Beza's text reprinted with some minor differences. The advertisement in the 1633 edition read 'Therefore you have the text now received by all in which we give nothing altered or corrupt.'

@anickelsworthbiblereviews

4 ай бұрын

Interesting info.

I have, and use many versions, but my preference is for TR based Bibles. I too fear that Bible translation may be headed for favoring cultural norms, which would then cease to be Scripture, but some other thing all together. For that reason, I understand KJVO, but I am not in their camp.

Great job! Love the KJV for the poetic cadence of my favorite passages. Love the NKJV for easier reading and understanding of some of the trickier language of the KJV. Love the ESV, and NASB/LSB for another word-for-word perspective, in clear language. And waiting to receive an NLT for a more thought-for-thought perspective.

I read the nkjv and nasb 95..but more recently ive used the nasb 2020. Loving all of them.

I agree with you on the Textus Receptus brother!

Thank you for this video, My pastor studied the biblical languages, he also believes the Textus Receptus is the superior manuscript. He reads other translations, but at church he uses the kjv.

Thanks for this video Tim. I struggle to understand the rationale behind the recommendation that we make a TR based translation our main translation. Whatever the case, I have no doubt that the good English translations we have today (Such as the ESV, NKJV, KJV, NASB95/20, NIV84/11, CSB, etc.) are the inspired Word of God that God is evidently using to transform and sanctify many lives. The fact that NT writers repeatedly quoted from the Greek translation of the OT (LXX) which can at times differ substantially from the Hebrew manuscripts tells me that the Holy Spirit can work beyond translation quirks and that we need not split hairs over the matter or question whether the translation we are using is the Word of God or not. At some point we need to put aside petty debates that have been a distraction more than anything else and just get our heads in the Word!

I believe the WEB used the TR. And yes, I’ve watched Mark Ward’s videos on Wescott and Hort, excellent information. I wish there was a modern English update of the Latin Vulgate.

@anickelsworthbiblereviews

4 ай бұрын

WEB uses the majority text.

@fnjesusfreak

4 ай бұрын

For the New Testament there is the Confraternity Version. But they never finished doing the Old Testament in that mode, because _Divino afflante Spiritu_ happened in 1943 and they changed tacks and created the NAB instead. It would be interesting to get a few translators together and do a complete translation strictly from Michael Tweedale's Latin text, perhaps with reference to the original languages, and perhaps also including a translation of the Juxta Hebraica psalter.

I grew up reading the nkjv so that's my main bible. I also read the esv and a few others. The vulgate interests me, ill have to check it out. Thanks for the video 👍

I agree with you, Tim. I love the NKJV and the KJV.

@barbs1298

4 ай бұрын

Been a NKJV for over 40 yrs. Just now using NLT chronological study Bible which has great notes to help me understand things much better.

@christinawynkoop4027

4 ай бұрын

@@barbs1298 Good for you. I love that! Thanks for sharing.

LSB and KJV for me. 👍🏼 Both main text bases, modern English, with traditional KJV text. Superb

youtube wouldn't let me like the video. The like button was missing. Great information, and agrees with my understanding.

It can be so confusing for people just discovering the bible. I was rased in orthodox household, we didn't even own the bible because bible supposed to be read to you not by you. As an adult i decided to readucate myself, what do you think i bought? KJV of course! I didn't understand it at all, so put it at the back of my wardrobe for many years. And then i found out about other translations and that was revolutionary to me. But unfortunately did face some criticism that i am not reading the proper bible 😢. Now it doesn't bother me anymore, i found peace in what is best for me and my personal spiritual growth and i read multiple translations but not KJV! 1st of all its still hard and 2nd, certain people repell me from it.

As I understand it, the Alexandrian texts are not that numerous, but are older than the much more numerous Byzantine ones. As for translations, I do not use paraphrases or dynamic ones. My go-to translations are NKJV and NASB; I have a bunch of other translations, but most of my Bibles were bought for their study materials, not the translations themselves. The (H)CSB is pretty good, but I bought my Apologetics and Worldview study Bibles for their content, not the translation (it's a bit jarring to read the CSB and get hit with the contractions; not used to that).

I love the general statement of “the church” through the centuries when he knows full well that it was the Catholic Church. I always find it confounding it how Protestants have 100% in the canon of the NT when the Catholic Church that declared the canon at the Council of Nicea was already teaching the Eucharist, confession, infant baptism, prayer to the saints, etc.

@anickelsworthbiblereviews

4 ай бұрын

Prove it. You can’t. That stuff didn’t come into play until centuries later. And please don’t say it was simply affirmed at these very late councils. Prove it was already in place pre 400s, other than the canon which never included the apocrypha.

Thanks Tim. Very interesting. One thing that I know for sure and feel confident of authenticity, is the Holy Spirit. If we opened our heart to God through Jesus, we have been given a great gift, the Holy Spirit. I rely on Him all the time and He will guide us, teach us, comfort us and much more. When I read the Word, He is very present with me quickening and instructing me.

@anickelsworthbiblereviews

4 ай бұрын

Well said!

I couldn't agree more. I have long said that people should use translations from each stream of thought. Find a good one that you enjoy in both and that will give you a well-rounded view of scripture.

@anickelsworthbiblereviews

4 ай бұрын

That logic checks the boxes for me.

Thank you Tim. I don't know enough to critique nor give my opinion. However I do believe this is the inspired Word of God. I do read various translations. I have read the the NKJV several times & the ESV an now reading & comparing translations as well as NRSV. Definitely avoid culture influence the Bible leads to tge word corrupted. But I disagree with only KJV & disputing the Greek, seriously. I wish I could understand Aramaic & Greek. For now am working on Latin with this aged brain.

The king James preface says they were not inspired. Funny that people today contradict the translators.

@anickelsworthbiblereviews

4 ай бұрын

It’s an interesting debate.

@missinglink_eth

4 ай бұрын

@@anickelsworthbiblereviews I appreciate the nod to Mark Ward. He’s been doing great work trying to bring both sides together, peacefully. There’s a ways to go but it will happen. I grew up on KJV. Now I read many translations. My preference is ESV but I try to read NKJV as much as possible to see it from both the CT and TR. I think they are both fantastic translations, as are most modern English translations, imho.

@fnjesusfreak

4 ай бұрын

You'll find some types who believe that the printers went behind the translators' back to add the notes and that preface.

@7Dorie

4 ай бұрын

It may be that people mean different things when they use the word 'inspired'. Perhaps the translators were merely led by the Holy Spirit to correctly translate God's Word in accordance with God's will in such a way that the English translation is as inspired by God as the original version. They themselves are not the source of the inspiration, nor even the conduit. The inspiration is all in and from God, the Holy Spirit and God's Word.

@ChathuraImbulagoda

4 ай бұрын

@@7Dorie [Job 32:8 KJV] 8 But [there is] a spirit in man: and the inspiration of the Almighty giveth them understanding. Yes your right, the above is the first time inspiration is used and it talks about God giving man understanding. We believe that God Gave the KJV translators understanding in translating the scripture. What the translators thought is irrelevant.

In regards to the quality of the Alexandrian text-type vs the Byzantine text-type, the reason why most Bible scholars hold the view that the Alexandrian manuscripts are closer to what the originals looked like, compared to the Textus Receptus, is not just the much older age of them compared to the majority of manuscripts used for the Textus Receptus (which were mostly from the 11th century), but also, because they have compared these two text types to ancient translations into other languages, like Old Latin, Coptic, Syriac, Armenian, Georgian, etc and for the most part, the Alexandrian texts are more in line with those translations than the TR. That's what I've read anyway.

I prefer TR but I will say, CT has a really great literal experience. I also find some really easy to read. I found CSB so easy to read lately. Overall I just like KJV & NKJV but I’m not an onlyist and I love ESV. I really want to get the KJV Allan 53. I buy Concordia commentary series where they translate the original text back to English and often times I do find it really close to LSB/NASB.

The texts were handwritten and according to my really OLD school days before computers, copying means a mistake. Man has added punctuation and then came verse along with chapters. I'm all for this part because of Paul's world longest sentence. I wonder what happened to the OT scribes that copied wrong in front of their teachers. There's a legend about the translators of the KJV from the king.

I understand your point of view Pastor Tim. That is a good recommendation if we would only be dependent on the English translation. But it would still be best to really learn the original languages and have like what can be had like I do, the Tanakh, the LXX, Patriarchal 1904/12, Tyndale Greek New Testament and a Nestle Aland Greek New Testament. When I studied original languages before, it opened my eyes that learning from the original is best. Because although our English translations are still as reliable, they feel like Cliff Notes of the actual scriptures. Well, it's just me though but do you think I make sense?

@anickelsworthbiblereviews

4 ай бұрын

I made this point in the video.

@chris12780

4 ай бұрын

@@anickelsworthbiblereviews it must have slipped my mind. My apologies.

@chris12780

4 ай бұрын

@@anickelsworthbiblereviews my comment should have been I second your motion. My bad!

A review of the simplified KJV would be Great😀

The King James bible was what Moses wrote down to guide future Israelites and was the one Paul used and referenced 😉

@anickelsworthbiblereviews

4 ай бұрын

Ha ha.

@joestfrancois

4 ай бұрын

Was that guy joking though?

@RevDavidReyes

4 ай бұрын

@@joestfrancoisI sure hope so

@Agben35

4 ай бұрын

Haha, early in the argument I saw someone quip, “if the KJV was good enough for the Apostle Paul, it’s good enough for me!”😊

Excellent - I appreciate all the research you've done. You sure did share a lot in 14 minutes. I also speak Spanish fluently which gives me a little different perspective to some that only know English. I've also taken a few Seminary Courses and have led several Bible study groups. I think its super important to believe that Genesis through Revelation is THE WORD OF GOD -AMEN. Anyone that doesn't is misguided. I also recommend to use several Translations. I've met multiple people though that are shocked that newer Translations have removed some verses that are in the KJV AND NKJV. Where as they don't understand the reasons behind it. I think its important that we have footnotes explaining these things. Ultimately, I'm super confident in God that He is PERFECT & people that are seeking Him with their whole heart will find Him! You are very knowledgeable when it comes to this topic & I love how humbly you communicate it, God Bless. If everybody would just focus on what happened at the Cross & then the Resurrection we can heed the warning of avoiding the legalism & hypocrisy of the Pharisees & Sadducees.

I agree! Great video. I very much prefer KJV but I do have other translations and use them in Bible study teaching. I personally have never felt a translation read ME like the KJV Bible

An excellent video from 'Truth is Christ' yt channel is a video called: KJB or Modern Bibles?'.

Did the interlinear thing some 30-odd years ago. Now I use two (relatively) recent translations (Spanish is my first language). One is TR, the other one is CT. It seems enough for God's word to continually change me.

@anickelsworthbiblereviews

4 ай бұрын

The interlinear was out in the 1800s. Hendrickson reprinted them some years ago. I’m sure they were even more before that one. Don’t know.

I still use the KJV, but i also use the LSB, NASB and the NKJV

I look at other versions but a TR based one is what I still prefer as my primary bible. One it is what I grew up with and it feels so good to read and two paleography (what has been used to date ancient manuscripts) is not an exact science. It can be fooled and has been fooled many times in the past.

I love the KJV Bible. However, I confess that I find the NKJV easier to read, so I study the NKJV and read the KJV for its soul building beauty. I do also have several more modern translations (ESV, NET, NASB and CSB) that I refer to sometimes. I really enjoyed this message and tend to agree with you. I believe that a wide range of sources translated by conscientious teams of Godly people is ideal. Thank you, Tim!

The ASV is the RSV but slightly modified for an American audience, their both based off the WH GNT.

@MAMoreno

4 ай бұрын

The RV is the British translation from 1885. The ASV is the American edition from 1901. The RSV is the revised American edition from 1952.

@anickelsworthbiblereviews

4 ай бұрын

Yeah. I believe you meant the RV.

Could you post some links to the translations from the Majority Text ? I have some trouble rustling them up here in Europe.

@anickelsworthbiblereviews

4 ай бұрын

Broken Yoke for the WEB and NJVBible.com.

The problem with Ruckmanism - the idea that the KJV represents a new original, re-inspired by God in 1611 - is that it implies that God was unable to preserve his word for 1500 years.

@BMB125

4 ай бұрын

Right, and so does textual criticism

@anickelsworthbiblereviews

4 ай бұрын

Textual criticism risks taking it even further by claiming we don’t currently have the best manuscripts or that God’s word can even be altered with new discoveries. While that’s a frightening idea, we can be thankful that hasn’t happened.

Excellent video Tim, thanks as always. Listen, as a non-believer in Christianity, I find this fascinating and without going so far as to weigh in on the argument I just want to make an observation. Most Christians don't get their beliefs from the Bible, they decide what they want to believe and then go looking for conformation. Most Christians don't actually read their bibles. I Read the NASB 40 years ago when I did believe. When I came back to the Bible, for the stories, and to check if it said all the things people said it did, I bought a NRSV and found a New English Bible. Reading now, I can say that it is clear very few "Christians" have much familiarity with the Bible, especially the Hebrew Bible. They pick out what they want it to say and ignore the rest of it. So the source documents or the translations are a non-issue. But as always, a great, sincere vid. There should be more Christians like you.

@anickelsworthbiblereviews

4 ай бұрын

Thank you kind sir. I’ve made it my life mission to not only read the Bible multiple times a year but to commit to understanding it in its original context. It is a life long journey no doubt. I hope the words you read inspire you back to the faith. Blessings.

@joestfrancois

4 ай бұрын

@@anickelsworthbiblereviews You are welcome. If more followers of Jesus actually followed I think it would be a good thing. As to faith, well, I am reading, Israel Finkelstein's "The Bible Unearthed," and it is making more sense than some claims in the Hebrew Bible. I no longer have a label I self-apply, but I have come to see Christianity as a thing created by mankind. I used to think that there was some great "truth" to the universe. Now I do not think the universe is concerned with how humanity feels about things, if it is a sentient entity at all.

@gilbertculloden87

4 ай бұрын

​​@@joestfrancoisBe aware that Finkelstein is very much a "minimalist" on ancient history, ie prioritizing archaelogy over all textual sources. This is problematic since the physical remains from ancient times are so sparse and ambiguous (not to mention inscriptions can be just as propagandic as written texts). I recall one otherwise sympathetic review of Finkelstein's book stating that "his imagination outstrips the evidence" and I'd say that's a fair assessment. I would recommend William Dever's What Did the Biblical Writers Know and When Did They Know It? as a counterpoint to Finkelstein (and I'd say Dever is closer to the majority of scholars on the subject). Dever is certainly skeptical (he rejects the historical reliability of the patriarchal narratives, the exodus, and the conquest narratives) but he presents a strong argument that the Biblical history from the period of the Judges onward presents a reasonably accurate account of Israelite history that fits archaelogy. He also spotlighs some of the flaws in Finkelstein's approach. For a "maximalist" position Kenneth Kitchen's On the Reliability of the Old Testament defends the reliability of the entire Old Testament history, and I personally find it persuasive. If nothing else be aware that Finkelstein is certainly not universally accepted on this subject. Regarding your first comment, while KZread comments are not the place to have a theological debate, I don't understand how you can sincerely claim most Christians have chosen their beliefs independent of the Biblical texts. If you examine Christian writings, whether Irenaeus, Augustine, or John Calvin or later Puritans, you will find meticulous attempts to make sense of the Biblical texts and their moral commands. From your comment I cannot tell where you feel believers are falling short of the Bible's commands. However, if your objection is simply something like "Christians don't follow the dietary laws of the Old Testament", then I'm not sure if you've really tried to understand Christian theology, since even a brief Google search would provide you with plenty of articles (let alone reading something like Calvin's Institutes or Augustine). Regards

@joestfrancois

4 ай бұрын

@@gilbertculloden87 Dever's work looks interesting and I may head that way next. Right now I have just finished the Hebrew Bible and am going to read the Apocrypha for the first time. Then I m going to read the New Testament in chronological order of the supposed dates the books were written. I am curious as to how DNA evidence demonstrates or does not demonstrate what is written in the Hebrew Bible. That is another thing I may pursue. As far as the comment about "Christians," I should have qualified that. I was speaking of 21st Century American Christians. For example, Joel Osteen is a "Christian" as is Kenneth Copeland. Even a weak familiarity with the Christian Bible shows these guys to be charlatans. In US culture, so many people have "Jesus" in their mouth that have very rarely opened a Bible. I recall watching a KZread vid where a supposed lifelong Bible-believing Christian did not know more of King David than the Goliath story, didn't know he had written a lot of the psalms. Seems if you had believed the Bible your whole life you might have read it as well. The "truth" of the Bible is that it has been woven into our culture, whether or not it is historically accurate. Now it is being wielded as a weapon by the right. And they don't read it.

Now I need a blue Bible 😂

I agree. I prefer translations based on the TR, as the most reliable. NKJV is my favorite translation for casual reading, with the KJV a close second.

Don't you think God would have overseen the translation process, and made sure His word remained accurate through the ages.

I came to the same conclusion: a translation from every text source. I started exploring Christianity 24 weeks ago. There is too much "culture" in modern translations. Funny that you mention WEB. I bought a leather print edition of that translation from Broken Yoke Publishing on sale a few weeks ago.

My mind CANT EVEN FATHOM how someone would think that the only true word of God in history is an English translation that was done in England in the 1600’s lol. If that really is the case, then non English speakers is hurting. That being said, I’m a TR preferred person. I preach from the NKJV and KJV. I trust those New Testament manuscripts and feel confident in doing so. But I don’t knock anyone for reading the NIV, ESV etc. One factor many people fail to remember when this topic is debated is, the Bible is the only book that while you are reading it, the author is right there with you. Listen to the Holy Spirit while studying and He will guide you.

@anickelsworthbiblereviews

4 ай бұрын

KJVo folks are wild ones for sure.

@chris2fur401

4 ай бұрын

@@anickelsworthbiblereviewsgreat video pastor

How do you memorize Scripture when you read from all these different translations?

@anickelsworthbiblereviews

4 ай бұрын

For me, I have verses memorized in the ESV, NKJV, and KJV. Sometimes they get blended.

@mrmainzer1

4 ай бұрын

Thanks for answering. As I've been saved for over 50 years, the KJV has been my Bible. I love it and have many verses memorized from it, for which I thank the Lord. I really don't find a need to read other translations, esp. as it would confuse my memory. Enjoyed your video, esp. what you said in regard to the TR.

I read that "gamal" in Aramaic can be translated "camel" or---"ROPE"! Now it suddenly makes sense that passing a rope through the eye of a needle is nigh impossible, whereas camel sounds ridiculous. Of course, the point remains: what is impossible for humans is possible for God. Yet even knowing this, translators are slow to replace "camel" with "rope" simply because that's what people are used to hearing. I suppose that's okay, since the point of the analogy remains: God can do the impossible.

🤔You make me think a lot Nickels🤔

Novum Testamum Grace 😉

@anickelsworthbiblereviews

4 ай бұрын

What’s a lost syllable amongst friends?

@mb9484

4 ай бұрын

@@anickelsworthbiblereviews Amen!

@anickelsworthbiblereviews

4 ай бұрын

I’ve heard that last word pronounced three ways, so I just went with phonetics.

@mb9484

4 ай бұрын

@@anickelsworthbiblereviews Yeah, there's 3 philosophies for Latin pronunciation. Restored classical (Gr eye kay), Ecclesiastical (Gray-chay), and how it was actually pronounced in history (however the speaker felt like saying it at the time!)

If we do not have the Words of God in our own language, what do we have? Also, you will remember the tower of babel, the punishment? No one could understand each other, hence, languages. Also, it seems to me that people get twitchy around the KJV, not nonbelievers, but, Christians. Why is that? If the new translations are not the very Words of God, why do people who hold up the new versions as “getting closer” get upset at someone who believes that the KJV is the Word of God in English?

@anickelsworthbiblereviews

4 ай бұрын

🤷🏻‍♂️

@MAMoreno

4 ай бұрын

Any translation is a representation of the inspired Holy Scriptures in our language. As the KJV translators themselves said, even "the very meanest [worst] translation of the Bible in English . . . containeth the word of God, nay, is the word of God." However, no translation is "the word of God" in a definitive and authoritative sense. It's sheer hubris to insist that English must be the new Holy Language, much as Latin supposedly was. Translations, English or otherwise, derive all of their authority from the Hebrew and Greek texts that were initially inspired.

@RevDavidReyes

4 ай бұрын

@@MAMorenoKJV only don’t believe in the very words of the people who translated the KJV😂

@bk24708

4 ай бұрын

People need to see the benefit to KJV. The poetry is really good and pronouns make it easier to tell who the text is talking about. I was reading Jonah chapter 2 in church comparing it to modern translations.

@MAMoreno

4 ай бұрын

@@bk24708 Plenty of people see the benefits to using the KJV . . . alongside other translations. There are three categories of English-speaking believers: those who can't and/or won't use the KJV, those who attempt to force the KJV on everyone as the only acceptable translation, and those who enjoy the KJV as a classic translation of the Bible. As similar as they sound, the second and third categories are not alike. At best, the second category is like those people who insist that you can't put ketchup on a hot dog. I happen to prefer mustard, too, but I'm not about to knock a frank out of someone's hand and tell them that they're committing a grave sin by using the NLT--er, I mean Heinz 57.

Thanks, Tim. Really appreciate the informative video. I really like the KJV but I often find it helpful to also read the ESV; it's interesting to do the comparison and differences between the two. I don't own the NKJV, nor have I read it, but I may have to give it a look. What are the big differences between the NKJV and the ESV? Again, thanks for putting this great video out.

The KJV was great in 1611, and a lot of people still use it, but it's outdated. The NKJV and ESV are fine, don't let the KJV-only types shake your faith.

Study to show thyself approved. That means don't rely on the English translations as being 100% correct as they do have errors. Use strongs concordance to check the where as that will change what the scripture actually says. KJV is not inspired as it has many errors especially in the Masoretic text. You can check this by going to the dead sea scrolls, using a LXX Septuagint and even the Samaritan Pentateuch which are more correct then the KJV. Don't get me wrong, I'm not saying that any of those others don't have errors but they are few compared to the KJV. Use multiple translations and stay away from niv, the message Bible, cepher, and many other corrupted Bibles.

@anickelsworthbiblereviews

3 ай бұрын

Actually the word study there doesn’t mean study, it means to be diligent. It appears in the New Testament 11 times and this is the only occasion it is translated study.

The Geneva Bible can be used to correct errors in the Nestle Aland corrupted greek text, since it was translated from the Textus Receptus. There is an issue when you omit Acts 8:37 and it changes the doctrine of believer's baptism. Maybe the Presbyterians like the verse removed so they can baptize infants instead. The early church fathers quoted verse 37 and it's in the Latin Vulgate, or was before pope John Paul II had it removed and is in the Douay-Rheims 1752.

@anickelsworthbiblereviews

4 ай бұрын

You’re the one I’ve been waiting for!

@frisco61

4 ай бұрын

Tell me ore about how JPII had a verse removed? I just read it, including it has no effect on infant baptism, I’m not sure how you think it does.

@abc123fhdi

4 ай бұрын

because it has to do with believers' baptism, Philip says if you believe you may get baptized, if you take that out then you don't need to believe to be baptized and saved.@@frisco61

KJV only crowd is more right than wrong. I am TR only because I like my bible to have all the verses.

@anickelsworthbiblereviews

4 ай бұрын

I am TR preferred.

Critical text is garbage.

@anickelsworthbiblereviews

4 ай бұрын

Ok

I'll take NASB, ESV over KJV ANYDAY. When it comes to thought to thought...NIV. God bless you! Thanks for a very informative video!!

I use the REB for my daily reading Bible, I like the way it reads and some might say it’s the most literary out of all the translations. It’s hard to find bibles in the REB translation in the United States for whatever reason, in spite of it being an authorized translation by the TEC, maybe because it’s a British translation? I don’t really know, but I compare that with a copy of the NKJV. For what’s its worth I also have an ESV and NIV Bible as well as a NASB and KJV in New Testament but I haven’t read either of those translations yet.

Hey Tim, great video. Also, my question is, when it comes to the KJV being just as inspired as the original, have you seen the numberical anomalies that are found in the KJV? For example the very first and very last verses of the KJV bible both have 44 letters, 17 vowels and 27 constenants, and hundreds of other anomalies of that sort that seem to be found only in the KJV. (Not saying others aren't inspired btw as i do also read newer translations) But was just wondering if you've come across this kinda stuff as it seems somewhat unrecognised and unmentioned when it comes to the topic insiration and translation. Once you look into it, it seems like the possibility of this happening is impossible unless it was God that did it. But ill leave a link if your ever interested. God Bless kzread.info/dash/bejne/mIegwZmqYLCYlqg.htmlsi=Z71ifhnApqJpS83a

@anickelsworthbiblereviews

3 ай бұрын

I find these interesting, but that’s about as far as it goes for me.

​@anickelsworthbiblereviews one of better videos, and not entertaining as some others