We don't need another version of the Bible any more than we need to re-write the Constitution. What we need is born again, spirit-led people to trust and obey that which has already been declared.

@WKDMOUSE67

5 ай бұрын

Hallelujah amen

@believestthouthis7

5 ай бұрын

You are right. We need more believers that actually read the Bible that we already have and trust and obey God!

@alexkelley385

5 ай бұрын

Especially if you understand the Hebrew/Aramaic and Greek text in which the Spirit inspired.

@gamewizard1760

5 ай бұрын

How are you saved without an accurate Bible? If it's not accurate, it's not the word of God.

@TheCableStrain

5 ай бұрын

​@@alexkelley385God preserved His word and through preservation, inspiration is passed to copies. That's how it's always been. God didn't communicate that only the first drafts in the first languages were Holy Scripture.

"IT IS BETTER TO TRUST IN THE LORD THAN TO PUT CONFIDENCE IN MAN." - Psalm 118:8; KJV Bible

@JohnWallace74

5 ай бұрын

Great Video. I have a question. What is the original text used for translation of the LSB/NASB. Is it the Masoretic Text of the Old Testament, and the Textus Receptus family of the Greek New Testament as does the KJV translation? If not please explain what is the original versions of text from and what is missing if anything from KJV. Thanks.

@Sethhaun78

5 ай бұрын

Exactly ..just beware and test the spirit s...

@tressabaker6514

5 ай бұрын

Absolutely! Agreed 100%!

@ajaxslamgoody9736

5 ай бұрын

Man still had to write it and we have to be able to trust those men that got together in 400? AD to vote on every single book to leave it in as cannon or reject the book as non-canonical. Some versions are simply better...some bibles won't even use the word 'blood'. I believe these People and the publishers of the NASB are top notch. Didn't know about the ESV statements.

@redfaux74

5 ай бұрын

Isa 2:22

This sounds awesome. Been looking for a translation that follows the original source. Thank you!

A thoughtful, prayerful study of the Holy Scriptures based on the original Hebrew and Greek manuscripts is to be recommended and admired.

I grew up memorizing the KJV in the 70s. In my lifetime I’ve seen a couple dozen translations, each claiming to be better than the other. This over saturation is tiring, I’ll just stick with my trusty old KJV, thanks…

@pw1715

5 ай бұрын

kjv is not very accurate,

@knartsylady

5 ай бұрын

@@pw1715 In who's opinion? God would say otherwise. I've put several comments on this video to explain ....if you're curious and truly seeking to know what God would approve of look into the channels I recommended. God bless.

@GailS.7777

5 ай бұрын

@@pw1715 I believe God at His Word and not your opinion.

@BDTillson

5 ай бұрын

I humbly suggest you watch James White's debate or read his book on The King James Controversy.

@Mikhael1964

5 ай бұрын

You mean the most anti Semitic translation ever. The KJV was written when anti semitism was still rife and endorsed. It's translation shows this in many ways.. Thus it's an anti Christ version.Christ was a Jew do you know..

With respect, I have to say that the bell I hear ringing is that John Macarthur is involved with this. Ok, it may well be good, but here is one problem I have. John Macarthur was asked in an interview what problem he had with evangelicals disgreeing with calvinisim. His reply was that they did not interpret Scripture properly. So, does he believe this translation supports calvinisim???

@EvieBear236

5 ай бұрын

All translations support Calvin's view of salvation.

@paulperry968

5 ай бұрын

There are a lot of scholars who have long disagreed with this assertion. That statement can only be an assertion, by itself it cannot be truth.

@Pepsiguy

5 ай бұрын

Calvinist’s and pre-tribers are both over the top in defense of their positions. It’s uncomfortable to watch.

@craigime

5 ай бұрын

Fortunately, (1) his involvement was very little and (2) the committee's calvinism didn't creep into the text. So the LSB is safe for use.

@craigime

5 ай бұрын

​@@EvieBear236no they don't

Upon what manuscripts is the Legacy bible based? I steer clear of the codices Vaticanus and Sinaiticus.

@joshuaweber3676

4 ай бұрын

Apparently the translators based it on the MT for the OT and (primarily) the NA27 for the NT, the latter of which draws most heavily on Codex Alexandrinus (and its associated text family).

@BiblicalStudiesandReviews

4 ай бұрын

This is a Critical Text translation. It would be closer to the Vaticanus/Sinaiticus MSS than the Byzantine tradition

@felipekennedy3135

3 ай бұрын

Great, the corrupt translator of the vatican. Which represents all the new age Bibles and modifications of many biblical verses.

@ounkwon6442

3 ай бұрын

Most Accurate manuscripts, of course

@user-yc3jy7kf7r

3 ай бұрын

The LSV was done by all Calvinists so it has preconceived leanings.

Hi Ken, thank you for this interview. Now I know about the LSB.

100.00 too expensive for me.Must be for wealthy believers. Lucky to get food for the month on Social Security!

@dogboymalone11

5 ай бұрын

ME TOO.

@liviloo87

5 ай бұрын

100 bucks?!?! I bought a Bible for my son the other day at Walmart for $17. It’s a new King James. 100 is way too much lol

@shelbiebertolasi7141

5 ай бұрын

My church gives out bibles for free.

@seapanther53

5 ай бұрын

​@@fouracrefamily9801​@fouracrefamily9801 I think she is simply pointing out that if you need a Bible, go to your local church, and they'll give you one free.

@BiggSheppTheManMythAndLegend

5 ай бұрын

@@fouracrefamily9801 She spoke clearly. Are you illiterate? Should we pray for your ability to comprehend? 🙄🤔

Your translation Philosophy sounds very good. To go further what is your manuscript philosophy? Does the Legacy Bible maintain the Received text or the Critical text?

@rdrift1879

4 ай бұрын

Critical text. It is a rework of the NASB.

@EleazarDuprees

2 ай бұрын

Ironically, the same naturalistic philosophy used to establish old earth that Ken hates, is likewise used to establish new bible texts which Ken loves. Basically, papyrologists, and paleontologists wielding varying degrees of probabilities based on theories. ...purify your hearts, ye double minded.

I'm excited to study this translation. Thank you.

Very helpful. Thank you.

This LSB translation Swapped out the word DRAGON for JACKAL in almost every Old Testament Book. I have a MASSIVE issue with that as I do believe the Bible did mean Dragon (now called Dinosaurs) in many of those verses. JACKAL is a type of Dog, and Dragon is a type of unnamed Dinosaur. These are NOT the same...which is it?

@mikecrowley7486

5 ай бұрын

We won't know until God delivers the English text.

@njhoepner

5 ай бұрын

A "dragon" is a "dinosaur"? LOL

@shayalynn

5 ай бұрын

Dragon = serpent, I thought?

@eijentwun5509

5 ай бұрын

@@shayalynn certain Dragons/Dinosaurs are a TYPE of Serpent. so certain ones can be called a serpent. like the Leviathan which is a water/land dinosaur.

@harveynailbanger

5 ай бұрын

​@@shayalynnin either case it is not jackal...

Please read in the LSB-Bible: John 6: 47 „Truly, truly, I say to you, he who believes has eternal life.“
 Doesn’t everybody believe in something, even atheists?
 The correct verse is: „Verily, verily, I say unto you, He that believeth on me hath everlasting life.“

@KenJackson_US

5 ай бұрын

Which one is closer to the original Greek?

@EvieBear236

5 ай бұрын

@@KenJackson_US I think you mean Greek.

@chrisking6874

5 ай бұрын

​@@KenJackson_USwhich one do you think is more true? Believe or believe on me

@joohlee7702

5 ай бұрын

What we think is more true doesn't matter. The most important thing is to do the right translation.

@KenJackson_US

5 ай бұрын

@@EvieBear236: _"I think you mean Greek."_ Oops! You are indeed correct. Fixed it.

I love this! I’ve already learned some information just in this video I don’t know! Thank you guys!

Is it free on the YouVersion Bible app?

@rickpollen4984

5 ай бұрын

It is on the Bible app.

@kristin0943

4 ай бұрын

Yes 🤗

GOD gave us the word as a gift out of his Love for us... I always question whether people should be making a profit off of it anyway... It isn't ours to put a price on.

@Sundayschoolnetwork

5 ай бұрын

“The laborer deserves his wages.”

@eijentwun5509

5 ай бұрын

@@Sundayschoolnetwork For physical copies, but not for the text. the KJV is free to download for example

@Sundayschoolnetwork

5 ай бұрын

@@eijentwun5509 who does the printing, distributing, stocking?

@TennesseeWhiskii

5 ай бұрын

@@Sundayschoolnetwork I said I question. Not saying it's wrong but I have my thoughts because I think some can get greedy. I do understand the Labor that goes into the process. Especially when we get to things like commentary etc... My assessment could be completely unfair or ignorant.

@Bigfoottehchipmunk

5 ай бұрын

@@eijentwun5509 But a lot of people can't understand it.

How will you get a past the publishing, the book without changes, they will require of it without distorting God’s word?

@BEOWULF266

5 ай бұрын

It has already been published.

@itzcaseykc

4 ай бұрын

@Go2mychanelplz I agree. Most of the "new" improved versions out there had errors, some very erroneous ones, before they were sent to out for printing, of which the authors *knew about" yet sent them out despite such existing, which to me shows them to be thoroughly corrupt. IMO the KJV is the preserved word of God and has not needed updating other than several spelling & punctuation errors that came about by the early printing presses for the 1611 version.

@brotherinchrist72

4 ай бұрын

@@itzcaseykc The KJV is the one that any true Christian should be using. There is literally nothing new under the sun, as Scripture tells us. We already have the very word of God in the KJV, I agree!

@Spartan322

3 ай бұрын

Do you actually know what a textual variant actually is?

@itzcaseykc

3 ай бұрын

For anyone who doesn't know what Spartan322 "textual variant" means, this is a quote from Wikipedia says, "Textual variant in manuscripts arise when a copyist makes *deliberate* or *inadvertent alterations* to a text that is being reproduced." In the case of the various "translations" out there, it is deliberate on the part of many of these authors, and inadvertently due to misunderstanding what the Hebrew or Greek is saying. These authors were *not* inspired by God of the Cosmos and this world, but rather the god of this world, to create another "version" that is different than what the KJV Bible says.

what english translation you would recommend for Septuagint ?

Is this the same LSB (legacy standard bible) translation on the YouVersion of the bible app?

@planecrazy2

4 ай бұрын

Yes

I do have a question about the descendants of Shem. Did Arpachshad live 135 or 35 before he had a child. From verses 12-26 has a numbering issue with men being 100+, or it leaves out the 100 for the age of the men. Would you mind looking in to that issue. The LES and the LSB has that issue. I do appreciate your putting back Matthew 17:21, unlike the ESV and others have removed.

@OneHighwayWalker

5 ай бұрын

It's in brackets which means it's not in the original text.

@EvieBear236

5 ай бұрын

The ESV and LSB that I have do not remove these verses, they just make a note that those verses are not in the oldest manuscripts that we have.

@DarkPerry1.0

4 ай бұрын

⁠​⁠@Go2mychanelplz the KJB was an update of king Henry the 3’s bible which was mostly translated from the Latin vulgate, which was based off the Greek not the original Hebrew. The KJB is responsible for most cults actually,

@chadroehrick

4 ай бұрын

The LSB version on the Bible App says “35” not “135”.

I will stick with my KJV. I respect Dr McArthur but I don't trust copyrighted translations.

@dondgc2298

5 ай бұрын

So you don’t believe the Bible when it says the laborer is worthy of his wage? You don’t believe Bible translators deserve to be paid?

@craigime

5 ай бұрын

The KJV was also copyrighted genius🤦

@clelladams2326

4 ай бұрын

Geniuses like Craig can't discern between copyrighted for money or not.

@timmason925

4 ай бұрын

KJV is copywrited to the English Crown!!

@clelladams2326

4 ай бұрын

Bro. You can print it and reproduce it all you want. For free. Try that with the NIV or NASB. Etc. Let us know what your $$ fine is.

From what sources did he receive the Oral Traditions that determine the meanings of certain phrases and or words or have they been disregarded ? Who Authorized his translation ?

@Spartan322

3 ай бұрын

Do you understand what a textual variant is first?

@ronaldrogers4004

3 ай бұрын

@@Spartan322 what sources of text did the first Christians use and from whom did they receive it ?

@Spartan322

3 ай бұрын

​@@ronaldrogers4004 The first Christians used the Greek Septuagint and the many copies of that, they didn't even have a New Testament originally, it wasn't even written yet, John and Revelation wasn't even written until around 70AD and most Christians didn't know of it until the late second century in the best of cases, many Christians didn't have most of the New Testament in the second century and the few that had most of what they knew was only 81% of what Athanasius had in the 4th century, and the 2nd century Christians didn't yet include John or Revelation back then, and there were a few other epistles not yet recognized as such either. By the mid 3rd century everything we had was known and recorded only in Koine Greek, Jerome then also translated the Hebrew that he had into the Latin Vulgate, which was not the New Testament, Jerome used the Koine Greek for that because that's the language God used for transmission. As a result we have three original languages God used for manuscripts of Scripture by the 3rd century, the primary one being Koine Greek (which is the New Testament was originally written in and which alluded to the Septuagint Old Testament) with Hebrew being only found for the Old Testament (we still do not have the original Hebrew, only the later Masoretic texts made by the 6th century Jews) and Latin being a translation medium from the Greek and Hebrew. But thing is that the King James had none of these manuscripts, they had a copy of the Latin Vulgate, but they lacked the earlier texts of Greek manuscripts and and most of the texts they could've used for translation for a copy of the Latin, these manuscripts have additions and omissions not found in the earlier manuscript copies that the Christian made and used, nothing that changes doctrine, but there were three accounts added to the New Testament not found in the historical Scripture at all, the most prominent being John 7:53-John 8:11, the adulteress woman and "he without sin cast the first stone", that is not found anywhere in Scripture of the original texts and is only found in some manuscripts after the 10th century, and its not even always consistently in that place in John, sometimes it ended up in Luke or other places in John. We have since discovered things like the Dead Sea Scrolls and other New Testament manuscripts from the Koine Greek even, as a result we can further validate historically our records compared to the King James, which is what the translators of the King James wanted but couldn't have at the time, they even state this in regards to their original publication. The King James did not use these older historical manuscripts because they did not have it at the time, as a result a new translation has to minimally be made, but because of all the manuscripts we do have and the function of both Koine Greek and Ancient Hebrew, we can make many distinct translations of words and still completely correctly transmit the text. But of the preserved text, no regular person would be capable to read it, the King James is not special, its not an inspired word and it did not come from an Apostle, you don't have the capacity to read the language the Apostles wrote and we don't have any of the original manuscripts written by the Apostles anyway.

The start of the video says that the Bibal defines what it means by "day" The Hebrew day was sunset to sunset. Its length varied with the seasons but averaged about 24 hours. The first sunset was on the fourth day. The first four days were NOT normal Hebrew days however long they were.

@alanclark3400

4 ай бұрын

Ah ha, so you've noticed that according to Genesis - the sun wasn't made till the fourth day! I've brought this up in public forums and it's surprised many a church going believer. But it's in the book - black on white - whatever language you chose.

@markhorton3994

4 ай бұрын

​@alanclark3400 Yes, that part of the Bible is partially figurative just like where it uses the word sunset even though it is the Earth that is moving.

@oldtimerlee8820

3 ай бұрын

What is your evidence that the first 7 days, mentioned in Genesis were not 7 periods of 24 hours in duration? I used to be a theistic evolutionist, fully believing in the Big Bang and the earth is 13 billion years old. No longer. I have no valid reason to deny 7 days of 24 hours length.

@oldtimerlee8820

2 ай бұрын

@@Vulture402 Isn't that what most, if not all, evolutionists ask? Atheist's, theistic evolutions and everyone in between. What is your evidence for xyz in the Bible? The original poster, in the thread had a, new to me theory, about variation of length in the first 7 days. My question still stands and a little more defined -- What is your evidence, *from scriptures* that the first 7 days, mentioned in Genesis were not 7 periods of 24 hours each, in duration?

@philipdeppen3189

8 күн бұрын

@@oldtimerlee8820he fails to realize when God did this creation God didnt need the sun or moon to know his own design of time that he was putting in place for us. The sun and moon was designed for us to have the knowledge of a day and night and 24 hours not God. I totally agree with you

I am no expert but I have used the LSB for a while now and I find it very helpful. I thank those who did the translation.

@tagladyify

5 ай бұрын

How do you know if something is missing or changed?

@tagladyify

5 ай бұрын

No one knows what they don’t know.

@paulmader

5 ай бұрын

​@@tagladyify Well I guess I don't. I do trust the people who translated the LSB from the original languages. I am no expert in Greek or Hebrew. So I have to trust someone. Ther Masters University is definitely a place to be trusted.

@paulmader

5 ай бұрын

@FirstnameLastname-cz7bc Get a copy and read it for yourself,. I am sorry but I don't have time for that.

@craigime

5 ай бұрын

Good... keep using it brother, it's a good translation

Does anyone have this Bible of his? Please tell me if 1John 5:7-8 is describing the Trinity or denying the Trinity. Thanks

@WillyFehr

4 ай бұрын

For there are three that bear witness: the Spirit and the water and the blood; and the three are in agreement

@broz1488

4 ай бұрын

@@WillyFehr thanks, so it's anti trinitarian. Denying the Trinity of the Godhood, reducing the verses to merely a physical witness on earth.

@BlueDucm

4 ай бұрын

The Bible never mentions a distinction of persons in the Godhead, and the Father the Son and the Holy Ghost are all the same person, they are one as this verse says. The fullness of the Godhead is in Jesus Christ. The Godhead is indivisible (Deuteronomy 6:4) and the Father Son and Holy Spirit are all manifestations of the One true God, Jesus, the incarnation of the One God.

@swamprat22

4 ай бұрын

@@broz1488 no, it isnt "anti trinitarian" at all.

@broz1488

4 ай бұрын

@@swamprat22 does it also leave out verses like the other modern English Bibles using codex sinaiticus do? 1John 5:7-8 is a clear expression of the Trinity, if a bible censors the full verses, is it anything other than anti trinitarian? Such bibles are only fit for the pyre.

Do they have a sample one can see before you buy it?

I was just getting ready to buy a Macarthur Study Bible NASB and now I've been researching the LSB. I'm considering waiting for the Macarthur Study Bible LSB coming out in November, 2024.

I am confused. Is he saying that that Bible says ONE DAY and not DAY ONE? As in the first day, God didn't create X. And then He didnt create X day two. And X day three? It's more like one day God created X and then a second day God created X. Im not sure how to even ask the question because I'm confused

@warrencoffman724

5 ай бұрын

Yes I believe your correct one day not day one

@njhoepner

5 ай бұрын

This only matters if one believes the days come in no particular order. If "one day" is the first day, which is clear from the context, then this particular distinction is meaningless.

@richardbrown9760

5 ай бұрын

You don't like the evening and the morning where the first day. Why not ? The reason it says that in Genesis is to show that it was a literal 24hr day. I'll stick with the King James. Apart from all that if the original texts exist why can't it just be translated into English without someone coming along and translating differently. All these versions are just money makers.

@njhoepner

5 ай бұрын

@@richardbrown9760 Oh come on. The King James was not the first translation into English, no good reason for it to be the last. I'm sure good traditional Tyndale readers got all grumpy about the new-fangled King James when it came out too. The problem with evening and morning coming along as Day One (or First Day, it makes zero difference) is there is no sun yet...thus no possibility of a day/night cycle on earth. Authors weren't paying attention when they plagiarized Canaanite mythology.

This is quite remarkable and welcoming to me. I am no scholar of languages; however, I do know the extreme importance of the literal translations. I know how difficult itis to get a pure translation - speaking my home language and American - as many people today do. Thank you Dr.Chou and Mr. Ham for blessing us with this effort for purity of scripture - so many people have such even strange concepts about the Word. The clearer, the better. I think God had a perfect reason for the difficulty in translation, to makeus research all of His Word, I am just as guilty. So many, manydistractions!

@Silverheart1956

3 ай бұрын

You are aware that "literal translations" are often not the "clearer" Translations. The major reason Dynamic Equivalence Translations exist is to make Formal Equivalence Translations clearer. A really literal translation makes it difficult to understand cultural idioms, so you do have to become very acquainted with cultural contexts and even the languages. Most people don't have that much time. It is always wise to use more than one translation to study from. I have always recommended that effective study should use at least one Formal Equivalence Translation and one Dynamic Equivalence Translation. That helps balance out each methods weakness. DZ

@janeharring2430

3 ай бұрын

I think you were replying to 'goodworksfarm" and not to me. I just wanted to know where I can get a copy of this new Bible spoken of on this site. God bless.

Thank you both.

Fantastic to have Genesis with the NT, Psalms, & Proverbs!!!

As Ken Ham talked with Abner Chou, i was researching chapters 1-11 of Genesis about the LSB in comparison with the Hebrew text. Generally compatible translation, but i have very high expectations for a literal translation, so some notable things to share 1) LSB used 'man' for 'ha'adam' in 1:27 and 6:6 - the man or Man is better 2) 2:6 - LSB has 'a stream would rise from the earth' for 'eid' which is actually 'a mist' would ascend from the earth as water vapour ( Job 36:27). LSB made a mistake here as how could a stream water the face of the whole earth? 3) 3:18- 'eitsev hassadeh' should be 'the grass of the field' not 'the plants...' Hence cereals like wheat, barley, oats were specified as food from the beginning. 4) 4:15- 'put a sign to Cain', wonder why LSB chose a specific narrow meaning 'appointed'? 5) 6:3- LSB 'because he indeed is flesh', when the Hebrew was 'in that he also is flesh' - why the causative and affirmative sense? 6) 6:4- this is often found in other translations too - "also afterward" actually "v'gam acharei-chein" meaning "and even after so" indicating how the Nephilim came into existence rather than two occurrences at different times; the second clause confirming it about the sons of God coming into the human women (daughters of Man) 7) 10:11- LSB "he went out to Assyria" not likely as Assyria was not a named place then and there was no directional preposition 'to'. Should be "Asshur went out..." as Asshur was a son of Shem and became ancestor of Assyrians. 8) 11:2- LSB translated "mikkedem" as "east" instead of "from east" indicating the early travellers alighted from ark at Ararat and went westwards to find the plain of Shinar.

@gerriebell2128

4 ай бұрын

I speak 4 languages, and was an interpreter for the deaf. Any time you go from one language to another, there are words or phrases in one language that do not have an equivalent word in the second language. Also there are cultural cues that affect the meaning, synonyms, or usage of a word that is/are particular to the source language that would be different in the target language. So a “literal” translation is not as “accurate” as these people would have you believe. Also included in the mix is the translator’s mindset and doctrinal beliefs, that would affect or influence how a word or phrase in the source language is taken to mean, in turn, affecting what words are chosen in the target language to use. There are also words in the source language that have no modern equivalent in the target language. Dynamic equivalent translations are good in that they tend to go for meaning based on context and culture, but seem “weak” in how they translate. All of this to say it’s best to read and study from more than one translation, to get the “whole” message of the verses. The one major red flag to me is knowing that John MacArthur believes that the spiritual gifts of the Holy Spirit listed in I Cor. 12, died out with the apostles. They also dont think God heals very often nowadays. I think His team of translators, therefore, with that mindset, would translate things under that influence. No thank you.

@luketan7451

4 ай бұрын

@@gerriebell2128 I also speak 4 languages and studied both Hebrew and Greek. I understand what you mean about translation but I don't agree totally with all you say, especially when comparing with the original languages. Literal translation is also careful with culture and context, whilst dynamic equivalence also depends on the translators' mindset and beliefs. Yet I always remember what Jesus said about iota and stroke of letter not passing away, and I choose to respect the exact word used, even if it may be difficult to understand, or we think inappropriate or we feel a better word should be used. God and the inspired authors chose these words.

@gerriebell2128

4 ай бұрын

@@luketan7451 Thank you for answering me. Personally I don’t get super hung up on trying to find the “perfect” or “best” translation, because I don’t think “perfect” is possible (which was mostly my point before), and because I think God is always going to make sure there is always “enough” of the Truth about Him that we need, for having a relationship with Him and living a godly life. God isn’t playing “stump the students” with us. He loves us and won’t withhold the truth. So whatever mistakes are in translations, God will give us and make sure we have what we need. In the first 50 years after the crucifixion, maybe more, people did not have access to the whole of scripture like we have today, and they were able to live godly lives and worship God in spirit and in truth. Jesus promised the Holy Spirit would lead us to truth. So I think we are supposed to do the best we can and obey and live out what we DO know, and love others like Jesus loves us. (The discussion about dragon vs jackal was Interesting, but not necessary for salvation like the Gospel is.) Again, thank you for the little conversation. God bless you and keep you.

@luketan7451

4 ай бұрын

@@gerriebell2128 God bless you too. Just a gentle response, I just feel that God has in fact spoken and for the gospels, the truth was orally transmitted till God inspired the authors to write it down. For the epistles they were already extant but limited by circulation. Definitely, God loves us and is patient with us. But we must beware the "He will understand us" mentality. When we love someone, the words he or she says to us mean a great deal. And a faulty, diluted and half correct translation can lead a new believer or even conscientious veterans into wrong attitude and practice. How can we build a proper relationship based on incomplete or incorrect perceptions? How can we know the God that we say we believe if here and there, there are human interpretations that may be different from what He wants us to know? I agree there is no perfect translation but let us strive to get as close to the original as possible. Some people said they are okay with just knowing the principles of the text but how can we really know them if not through the text? As for 'tannim' translated as 'jackals' and not 'dragons', for me it's not just about basic salvation, but the truth being lost in the translation and there are other important matters like apologetics and prophecy and complete Bible picture. Words in Hebrew can lose their actual meaning when we interpret them using modern equivalence, for example is it 'badger's skin' for one of the coverings of the Tabernacle? What is 'behemot' in Job? (Just a hippo?) What are 'tannim'? These can be important like in Answers In Genesis ministry. Please bear with me, I'm just sharing my heart.

@gerriebell2128

4 ай бұрын

@@luketan7451 yes I agree with you. That is why I think we need to have the Holy Spirit in and with us leading us to truth, as Jesus said. Secondly, I believe that God WILL make sure there is the scripture we need to know proper practice and right attitudes, there truth about who God, Jesus and the Holy Spirit are. (But we need to SEEK the truth too) and thirdly, I think sometimes we have a hard time with so many translations available, so we just need to “do the best we can” and not get hung up on small things. But “do our best” doesn’t mean we just skip along and go our merry way. We ask Holy Spirit for guidance, study scripture enough to recognize when something sounds off in a translation, etc., and obey what we learn. We pursue a relationship with God. That is what I mean by do the best we can. Personally I read from two or three translations comparing, and even talking to God as I read, sometimes asking “why did you use THAT word in the sentence?” I’m impressed you know Hebrew and Greek, I don’t. I also think it is miraculous that the Bible has been preserved till now in spite of many attempts to pts to eradicate it. Anyway I should stop now. Thank you for your insights…. Such a treat to share info and faith.

I don't get it. Is this a new update of the text of the LSB? The LSB was released in November 2021. Has the text been modified since then? If not, why is the LSB suddenly newsworthy on this channel?

@howardparkes8787

4 ай бұрын

lol exactly what i was thinking. i appreciate your comment having some sense. its sad seeing all of these fundamental KJV onlys be so dogmatic about the bible.

@rstewart316

4 ай бұрын

I find that odd as well.

@1corinthians15.1-4kjv

4 ай бұрын

@@howardparkes8787 That's funny, I find it sad to see you defenders of the modern translations being so hell bound in defending your Bible of choice, that you will lie and even read a book with Gnostic roots to your death. Oh, by the way, the Gnostics, who literally were the founders of the antichrist spirit, as John warned about, denying the deity of Jesus Christ, also denied the existence of such a place like Hell.

Good thing God has made sure his word has been always accurate and accurately translated.

The waters are already muddied by so many translations it is most confusing to the layman. The last thing we need is another Bible translation.

@louistart1173

5 ай бұрын

Just learn Greek already.

@stillfishing4sheep

5 ай бұрын

Yes you’re right. My question is what about a translation that was never copyrighted, whom hath the right to copyright Gods word/s and all other co-writers that are passed on? What about a translation that has been paid for with both blood and self sacrifice? All of these long before my conception and birth. Most likely yours’ as well if you are reading this post.

@melaniebaynes2730

5 ай бұрын

​@@stillfishing4sheepIf you haven't watched them, I highly recommend the trilogy of film documentaries covering the history of the Bible. They are available on YT. First one is called 'A Lamp in the Dark, the forgotten history of the Bible', followed by 'Tares Among the Wheat, sequel to A Lamp in the Dark', then 'Bridge to Babylon, Rome and the road to ecumenism' (not entirely sure about that last bit). They are very good and informative.

@lisapatrino7405

5 ай бұрын

@carymalaski214 I would say that would be the apostles, and the holy spirit 🙌 I may have misunderstood.

@oldtimerlee8820

5 ай бұрын

From what I under stand it is not a new translation. The LSB, published in 2021, is yet another version of the NASB. Published by the Lockman Foundation, the NASB was revised in 2020. The LSB, is published by the Lockman Foundation in coordination with the Three Sixteen Publisher and the John MacArthur Charitable Trust. (Google search results.) Muddy water ..... Before the Lifeway Bookstore in our area closed, I used to roam the isles Bibles and have experienced the same confusion, first hand. Eyes got too old to read the small print in my KJV. Pastor recommended the NIV. Lifeway promoted the HCSB, at the time. I was also urged to get a hulking study Bible. I bought a NIV. Then A HCSB. A few more months later, I bought a KJV study Bible. That was before I learned the study part was adapted from the NIV. Today, my primary Bible, for daily use, is a plain, large print KJV. The rest are on a shelf, serving as a seldom used reference source.

As a Bible Believing Saved Sinner of 44 years, my Question is simply this. Does it have Copyright.?. Which means, they have to change the Materials used, by 10 %. Since the Transliterations from the 1782 Elizabethan KJV, IE The NKJV, has over 100,000 changes, or omissions. What Original Texts were used in this Transliteration.? As Hebrews, we use the Hebrews First/Renewed Covenant Texts. What is the answer to our Questions. Ahava In Ya'sh'u'ah Ha Mashiach Queensland Australia.🎉

@iaam8141

5 ай бұрын

Simple math: At 10% rate of change for each revision to be copyrighted, when it comes to the 10th revision a Book would have been totally mangled. Who would accept a 10% mangled-book, much less 100%?

@sixgun2543

5 ай бұрын

@@iaam8141what are y’all talking about? Most, if not all, modern English translations of the Bible are translated directly from original manuscripts, not the KJV. No translation to English is perfect because of language barriers. Only the original manuscripts are perfect, and then we need to have a thorough understanding of thousands of years of culture that haven’t existed in nearly 2 thousand years to fully comprehend everything. That’s why God gave us His spirit to give us understanding for us. Trust God and pray for discernment.

@johnrogers7185

5 ай бұрын

Before buying this Bible read "Things that are different are not the same"

@WmTyndale

5 ай бұрын

@WmTyndale For such are false apostles, deceitful workers, transforming themselves into the apostles of Christ. And no marvel; for Satan himself is transformed into an angel of light. Therefore it is no great thing if his ministers also be transformed as the ministers of righteousness; whose end shall be according to their works. 2Corinthians 11 Reply

@robcrobert

5 ай бұрын

@sixgun2543 there are no originals. God deals in copies not originals. God could care less about originals. We have today a perfect Bible in English, it is the King James Bible.

Great video, interesting. Would have loved to hear more about what the base text was used to translate this bible. Whether it was Textus Receptus or not

@EleazarDuprees

2 ай бұрын

That would be a NOT! Ironically, the same naturalistic philosophy used to establish old earth that Ken hates, is likewise used to establish new bible texts which Ken loves. Basically, papyrologists, and paleontologists wielding varying degrees of probabilities based on theories. ...purify your hearts, ye double minded.

Did it come in extra etude margin for great note taking?

What manuscripts did you use, please? Is 1st John 5:7 included? Sincerely

@craigime

5 ай бұрын

1 John 5:7 is not scripture, so no

@MrWrath777

5 ай бұрын

@@craigimeNONSENSE - there are 9 Greek manuscripts which have 1 John 5v7 and many old Latin manuscripts as well as other ancient translations. Your corrupt Vaticanus and Sinaiticus contradict each other 3000 times in the Gospels alone and agree with NO other Greek manuscript in the world.

@craigime

5 ай бұрын

@@MrWrath777 which 9 Greek manuscripts have it?

@garyhelton7

4 ай бұрын

KJV has all of it, the trinity ‭‭1 John 5:7 KJV‬‬ [7] For there are three that bear record in heaven, the Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost: and these three are one. This is another corrupt bibles from Satan.

That’s exactly what they did when they had the King James Bible they had over 50 people translating the king James version from the Greek and Hebrew into English so we have it in our English language. Why are we always trying to reinvent the wheel when God has already given us his word in English

@mariebo7491

5 ай бұрын

Because new manuscripts have been discovered since?

@GabrielEddy

5 ай бұрын

The King James Bible is an antiquated 400-year-old Anglican translation which utilizes Elizabethan prose and is completely disconnected from contemporary English-speaking laypeople, incorporating multitudinous Medieval-period archaisms, interpolations, mistranslations, translational inconsistencies, and unjustifiable omissions. Several modern translations rectify these shortcomings.

@bakivaotuua9120

5 ай бұрын

@@mariebo7491 New manuscripts are fake

@louistart1173

5 ай бұрын

The KJV was written in a form of English that the common English speaker wasn't even using at the Time. Go ask the average person on the street what a husbandman is.

@DixieDee

5 ай бұрын

@@GabrielEddy Not to mention the fact that those "Elizabethan" words weren't even around until Queen Elizabeth (the 1st) decided she wanted an elite language that would set her apart from the "commoner". Then, King James decided he wanted that in his translation.

How do you choose what the meaning of the words that have multiple meanings?

@keithjenkinsmodel

2 ай бұрын

I would always rely upon the Holy Spirit

Thank you for the info regarding this new translation. Years ago my Greek aunt told me to only read the KJV because it was the only translation that was in alignment with her bible written in Greek text. This new bible really excites me because it can be cumbersome pulling out my Strongs concordance to get to the original Greek and Hebrew words....this will be a great help! What a blessing!

Mr Ham: Why isn’t the word dragon in the Psalms and Isaiah? In Isaiah 35:7 it’s changed to jackals. Is that the exact transliteration? You’ve always been adamant about that?

@josiahpulemau6214

4 ай бұрын

The same Hebrew word is used in Deut 32:33, Ezekiel 29:3, and Isaiah 35:7. It also means a sea serpent or a “Jackal” 😂

@ShepherdMinistry

4 ай бұрын

NKJV and ESV translate Jackal

@joshuarobinson6873

3 ай бұрын

@@josiahpulemau6214jackel is a type of dog no where near a sea serpent..

@oldtimerlee8820

3 ай бұрын

@@joshuarobinson6873 Websters 1828 Dictionary Quote: JACK'AL, noun An animal of the genus Canis, resembling a dog and a fox; a native of Asia and Africa. It preys on poultry and other small animals. It is the Canis aureus of Linne.

@Spartan322

3 ай бұрын

Any who read Scripture with their heart and not their mind will be blinded to truth.

When you make changes to any Bible translations, you have to change it at least 10% to be able to get it to be put back on the market to be sold as a Bible how much did you change this Bible from God‘s original word to be able to be published?

@debravictoria7452

5 ай бұрын

Do you mean copyright instead of published? I don't know, but thought it had to have a copyright in order to make a profit. Not sure what the requirements are for that. Just asking, thanks.

@DaveGme

5 ай бұрын

Just changing God to Yahweh and Dulos to Slave gets you to 10%. We’ve been watering down the Bible for too long. Glad to see someone get back to what the words mean.

@WmTyndale

5 ай бұрын

@WmTyndale For such are false apostles, deceitful workers, transforming themselves into the apostles of Christ. And no marvel; for Satan himself is transformed into an angel of light. Therefore it is no great thing if his ministers also be transformed as the ministers of righteousness; whose end shall be according to their works. 2Corinthians 11 Reply

@Bigfoottehchipmunk

5 ай бұрын

It sounds like the intention is to make it more accurate to original texts by consistency of translation. If 10% is required, which I doubt for a Bible translation, since most stray from accuracy to "clarify" for the masses, then they probably hit that. This conversation is just announcing that Ken Ham is including it in his ministries and letting people know why.

@oldtimerlee8820

5 ай бұрын

@@Bigfoottehchipmunk In the US, if a Bible has a copyright, it cannot be published by anyone else. The KJV does not have a US copyright. It is also in public domain. To obtain a copyright, the material has to vary from other similar publications. It is at least 10%, if memory serves. It doesn't matter if it's a cookbook on desserts or a Bible with a copyright, the same rules apply. Only NEW writings by the actual author or publications placed into the public domain are free from copyright regulations. For example: To meet copyright requirements, IMO, is one of the why the HCSB changed servants into slaves in so many places in the Bible. The consequence is that the freedom to choose was limited. Servants have freedoms that salves do not have. There are countless examples of unnecessary changes to meet the percent of change target. Does it actually make a difference *in context* when a $100 (modern value) payment was made in pennies or denarius? BTW, the originals texts do not exist. The Bible records the destruction of some of them.

I would like to know how did they translated the word phobeo in Ephisians 5:33

question...Does the LSB use the Septuagint or the Masoretic text for the old testament or a combination of the two?

I have NAS Bible and LSB and I find that I love LSB with language when I try to remember verses like in Hebrews. I do not have English as my first language. Thank you Pastor Abner Chau.

@MrWrath777

5 ай бұрын

Don't be fooled this is a wolf in sheep's clothing use the KJB.

Having learned of the Catholic influence in the ESV, I'll stick with the KJV and Geneva Bibles. I'm not going to waste money on another new translation.

@user-vw9vs4jx9w

2 ай бұрын

Being a seeker of truth via discernment, the KJV changed "passover" to Easter? Just a thought. The blue letter bible download has all bible versions as well as reading the bible directly translated from Aramaic.. Seek truth.. I know and do read, the KJV myself but also the Witcliff bible is one of the earliest transportation as well..

As long as people are translating the original language, the truth is being broadcasted and talked about by many people, and I am constantly rejoicing for this! God The Spirit will fill who he will fill, and multiply His manifold grace. God bless

Love the LSB! 😀 Thank you Ken and Abner!

We already have an English translated Bible, the king James, I do believe we can get saved under other translations because it does have some of the correct wording and translation, but they do not agree with one another. This is an issue. This is why I stand on the King James only.

@heavenbound7

5 ай бұрын

👍

@BDTillson

5 ай бұрын

I humbly suggest you watch James White's debate or read his book on The King James Controversy.

@MrWrath777

5 ай бұрын

@@Daddy_Bear_722The Only Stupid one is the little bear who ignores the Word of The Almighty Bear, and who will look a fool when spued out of God's Mouth at the Rapture to endure the final Tribulation Antichrist system because he is a Lukewarm Laodicean christian.

@bradbowers4414

5 ай бұрын

They do not agree because translation is not exact, and there are some manuscript variations. Study a bit of another language and you will understand why. The original languages are authoritative, not the English translation.

@MrWrath777

5 ай бұрын

@@bradbowers4414NONSENSE.

I really like the LSB, I've obtained this new one a few months back. And, even followed Justin Peters all last year for a whole year of daily Bible Reading he has had on KZread as well. Been saving all these daily Bible Reading on my KZread Library so to go back and follow along reading as I listen over and over again. Its read good and its a blessing too.🤗

@tomgarrison5313

3 ай бұрын

You are one very confused person!

What is the cost for this Bible? Do you offer this Bible in large print?

How many translations does that make now? I've lost track. I still have my KJV confirmation Bible from 1966. Also have the NKJV.

What a mess... (The comments say it all)

@Bigfoottehchipmunk

5 ай бұрын

Why we should seek accuracy and not man's opinions, yes.

@bnf449

5 ай бұрын

​@@Bigfoottehchipmunk Seek to understand man's opinions about God's thoughts but demand to know the difference.

The Lord Spirit is active, the magnetism is evident, hearts are warming watching this, excellent work! All praise, honor and glory to the Father.

THIS is what I've been hoping for! I have learned in the last few years that the various translations still "hide" things from us and are the basis for some pretty peculiar ideas about God and how we are supposed to live. Putting an accurate translation faithful to original text is literally a Godsend...

@tomgarrison5313

5 ай бұрын

Excuse me, but there is no original text anywhere existing on earth to compare it with. We have no originals.

@TheOldBailey4135

4 ай бұрын

Would buy the Brooklyn bridge?

@tomgarrison5313

3 ай бұрын

Do you realize, there is no original text to compare with? Originals exist nowhere on earth. How can you make a translation that is closest to a text that exists nowhere on the face of the whole earth?

So it was translated from Aramaic and Hebrew ? What was the King James from ?

The first thing I want to ask is - if the first "translation" was the WORD OF GOD - why were further one's need? Weren't the original guys not given divine inspiration?

@EvieBear236

5 ай бұрын

UMMM...We don't all read Hebrew, Greek or Aramaic.

@alanclark639

5 ай бұрын

@@EvieBear236 Er hmm... that's rather my point - like if there was an all knowing omnipotent deity sending stuff down - it would be in a language we all understood. Many of these "translations" aren't - they're edited to suit a new agenda.

@GabrielEddy

5 ай бұрын

@@alanclark639 Nobody speaks Elizabethan prose nowadays. Actually, no one spoke Elizabethan prose in 1611, either! The KJV translators reintroduced the already antiquated prose to imbue the text with nostalgia and bombastic diction. The 1611 AV was commissioned and authorized by the Throne of England and the Anglican Church. It contained the entire Apocrypha, just like its English predecessors the Wycliffe Bible, Gutenberg Bible, Luther Bible, Tyndale-Matthews Bible, Coverdale Bible, Great Bible, Geneva Bible, and Bishops Bible. The following English Bible translations contain the Apocrypha: Wycliffe Bible (14th c.) Gutenberg Bible (15th c.) Luther Bible (16th c.) Tyndale-Matthews Bible (16th c.) Coverdale Bible (16th c.) Great Bible (16th c.) Geneva Bible (16th c.) Bishops Bible (16th c.) 1611 King James A.V. The first English Bible without the Apocrypha was printed in 1640.

@njhoepner

5 ай бұрын

Because it's a human invention, from the very beginning, just like all other religious texts.

@knartsylady

5 ай бұрын

@@njhoepner A human invention, eh? Are you aware of the enormity of the proof/authentication given within the King James Bible itself by way of numbers, words, placement of verses, chapters, books. The possibility of any of this being orchestrated by mere men is beyond the realm of belief. I've made other comments on this video to show where you can see this type of proof if you aren't too closed minded to check it out.

If this is a complete and accurate translation, why is Acts 8:37 not shown? It jumps from 36 to 38.

@mariebo7491

5 ай бұрын

Any footnotes to explain?

@alexleal9941

5 ай бұрын

Interesting, the Christian Standard Bible does the same thing, too!

@iaam8141

5 ай бұрын

@johnrogers7185, If you note carefully, the translations that remove (or corrupt) verses are usually the verses concerning doctrines, Jesus' deity, power of the blood, sodomy, casting out demons, etc. The powerful stuffs. That said. The KJV Bibles -- very old ones and newly pre-printed ones included -- had been subjected to verses being CHANGED SUPERNATURALLY. This is alarming. Many attribute this phenomenon as being the 'Mandela effect' taking place. I think the prophecy written in Amos 8:11-12 is in motion coming to pass.

@johnrogers7185

5 ай бұрын

Hebrews 3:16 kjv for some when they had heard did provoke howbeit not all that came out of Egypt by Moses. Hebrews 3:16 niv who were they that heard and rebelled? Were they not all those Moses lead out of Egypt Big difference!

@craigime

5 ай бұрын

Because that verse is not original

Interesting to hear your careful , detailed explanation!

Does it have cross references for study?

Did this version finally put the actual name of God back in the Bible?

@davewhite756

2 ай бұрын

Yes

Is it based upon the Byzantine Textus Receptus or the Alexandrian Vaticanus ?

@escapegulag4317

5 ай бұрын

Most likely not TR

@wretchedsinnerRighteousSavior

5 ай бұрын

Alexandrian - stick with the KJV. It's just an updated NASB

@hudsondonnell444

5 ай бұрын

The term "Textus Receptus" does not appear until 1633. It was coined by the printer Bonaventure as a selling point for the King James Version. The term did not exist in 1611. I have watched KJV Onlyist making erroneous claims for decades much of it has come from people who are correct about the apostasy of the Roman Catholic Mystery Babylon religion. Unfortunately the Gnostic apostates have won a battle thanks to the error of the KJV Only position.

@ambassadorlight3146

5 ай бұрын

Those who are born again, have the teacher, The Holy Spirit, who will give you the truth and discernment over what is right and wrong.

@tamie2714

5 ай бұрын

​@@hudsondonnell444Why don't you ask God, unless you don't believe in God. True believers of God are sealed with the Holy Ghost who teaches, guide , and confirms truth to them because he is the Spirit of truth.

Do you mean, "one day" or "day one"? There is a definite difference between the two. How do you translate the other days?

Nothing compares in beauty, clarity, and accuracy to the King James Translation.

@John-fk2ky

2 ай бұрын

You’re right on the first, but I question your judgement if you think the KJV is CLEAR. Half the time I’m having to look up the meaning of words that are just plain archaic or have changed meaning over the years. That seems like an unnecessary impediment to understanding for the sake of sounding pretty. If you want pretty, go read Shakespeare. The KJV also has an interesting list of inaccuracies that stem from the original chosen source texts. Nothing disastrous for basic reading, but to claim it is the most accurate is to have not done your research.

@craigime

2 ай бұрын

False

@1oxyoke

2 ай бұрын

@@John-fk2ky Watch The Story of English a nine-part television series, produced in 1986, detailing the development of the English language. Specifically, Part 3. I think it is Part 3. It is called a Muse of Fire. It is about the King James Bible and how it was translated and why they translated it with a small vocabulary (about 8000 words) to be read aloud. It is considered the greatest masterpiece of the English language ever produced. It does have a few archaic words and expessions in it ,but hardly noticeable and certainly not an impediment to understanding the text. It has impacted the English language and the lives of millions of people like no other translation.

Thank you for supporting ministries that teach a proper understanding of God's Word.

It's really alarming to me how people keep needing another "accurate" Bible. Is there Biblical discernment lacking that much that people can't understand it? You won't be able to without a relationship with Him. So maybe it isn't in the translation but with the heart? I'm sticking with Old King James. I've read some of the others, NIV, and others. I don't even really care for New King James. Maybe we should stop trying to change scripture , and let Him change our hearts? It's taken years, but each year The Lord has enabled me to understand more and more, as He grows me. Now even Numbers and Leviticus are enjoyable to me when I used to I once gritted my teeth to read through it. I don't trust why people keep trying to write new versions.

@craigime

5 ай бұрын

Tell me who's trying to change scripture?

@oldtimerlee8820

3 ай бұрын

@@craigime Authors and updaters of the Novum Testamentum Graece (Nestle-Aland ). It is on it's 28th edition. Initially printed in 1898. Considerable modifications since then. It's the basis for the NT in most modern Bible versions. The 29th edition is to be released soon, from what I understand. Many modern Bible publishers will issue revised editions following the release of 29. It's interesting to study the documents that underlie this and those for the OT modern versions, too. Many (most?) modern Bibles use the Biblia Hebraica Stuttgartensia for the OT. Originally published in the early 1900's, it's in it's 4th edition now. It's interesting to study its history, as well. In answer to your question, those who rely on "Critical text" are making fairly frequent changes to the scriptures.

@brianlove8413

3 ай бұрын

The Old King James, in old English?

@craigime

3 ай бұрын

@@oldtimerlee8820 those who rely on "Critical text"? you mean like the King James Bible?

@oldtimerlee8820

3 ай бұрын

@@craigime The KJV was first published in 1611. The "Critical Text" was formulated during the 1800's, especially after Hort and Westcott's work of 1881. Don't take my word for it. Look it up for yourself.

Great interview!

Do you offer a preview copy to pastors?

how is " Hades" and "sheol" and "Gehenna" translated in this new version? How is Hebrew "olam" and Greek "aion"/"aionios" translated?

@craigime

5 ай бұрын

How about you look it up yourself

@johnhoffman8203

5 ай бұрын

These were some of my questions also because of the confusion of age lasting vs eternal with regards to the Millennium.

Then there was Evening and morning is just fine guys, it lets us know that a day consist of day and night.

@2besavedcom-7

5 ай бұрын

The biggest problem is the translations (KJV included) that read: "the evening and the morning were the first day." This reading implies that a "day" is evening and morning, thus supporting the erroneous tradition that a day begins in the evening.

@pops6479

5 ай бұрын

With you on that point. Actually, that the evening was first, followed by the day, has a very direct relevance to the death and resurrection of our Redeemer YAHUshua. Although we congenially phrase it as 'day & night', yet the Messiah was the full three nights in the sepulchre before fulfilling the three days. His burial took place between the ninth and twelfth hours of the daytime, i.e. 3-6pm, rising exactly three days & three nights thereafter, thus rising in the midst of the seventh-day Shabbat (equivalent to our Saturday).

@2besavedcom-7

5 ай бұрын

@@pops6479 - I think you misunderstood. The MORNING is the FIRST part of the cycle and there are 30+ Texts that show it clearly, especially creation, which I have pointed out. Notice also that the two Mary's waited till the END of the Sabbath to go to the tomb: "In the END of the Sabbath, as it began to DAWN..." (Matt 28:1)

@PastorBillwillard2147

5 ай бұрын

a Day does begin in the evening this was the case throughout history for the Jews and still is to this day. The Moon was the time piece God gave to His first Covenent people and the new moon was significant for tracking and measuring time. So For the Creator in Genesis He says that a day thats {24 hoursof time} having nothing to do with the daytime aspect of that 24 hours persay consists of an Evening and a Morning, not a morning and an evening this is what Moses wrote under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit so this is what is to be Believed. Plain and Simple.

@EleazarDuprees

2 ай бұрын

Ironically, the same naturalistic philosophy used to establish old earth that Ken hates, is likewise used to establish new bible texts which Ken loves. Basically, papyrologists, and paleontologists wielding varying degrees of probabilities based on theories. ...purify your hearts, ye double minded.

Is the Vaticanus text used as a basis for the New Testament? Please let me know the answer to this!!

@anthonyprose4965

5 ай бұрын

Yes. Worthless bible

@craigime

5 ай бұрын

​@@anthonyprose4965how is it worthless?

@MrWrath777

5 ай бұрын

@@anthonyprose4965 Well Said

@jackal4884

4 ай бұрын

@@anthonyprose4965how can you say that about the word of God

How old is Ham? Was the NASB written before 1960?

Thank you for the video! I think that this is cool! The Legacy Standard is on the Bible app.

Another side note, 47 scholars , some spoke many languages and one spoke 21 languages, so please let me know if any of the LSB has that track record. Took 7 years to complete ( Perfection by God ) the KJB 1611 and final punctuation , upper case LORD and lower case completed in 1769

@knartsylady

5 ай бұрын

@przerbst13, thanks for this! Too many people are unaware of actual history.

@glendashine9468

4 ай бұрын

7 does not mean perfection, it means completeness.

@MichaelZSr

4 ай бұрын

@@glendashine9468 yes correct completeness / fullness but in whole it is Perfection/ perfect in all ways, Jesus Christ. Psalm 12:6-7 ( pure) God's Word is perfect in all ways #7 is found in patterns and numbers all over the Bible

@EleazarDuprees

2 ай бұрын

Ironically, the same naturalistic philosophy used to establish old earth that Ken hates, is likewise used to establish new bible texts which Ken loves. Basically, papyrologists, and paleontologists wielding varying degrees of probabilities based on theories. ...purify your hearts, ye double minded.

Question: Did they use the Masoretic Text or Septuagint? Did they use all the extra books missing like the Ethiopian Geez bible, do they have the 12 tribes testimony, First Enoch and Jubilees?

@cmhanson

5 ай бұрын

@DeLaVieMedia None were used. Mr Chou states in video that this is the "legacy" of the NASB. No new translation but a play on words. TransLITeration NOT new transLATion. Nothing new for JM.

@craigime

5 ай бұрын

They used the MT for the old testament- unfortunately they weren't critical enough with that...There are no missing books

@clelladams2326

4 ай бұрын

Septuagint is fake as the Sinaiticus

Did they use the pure receive text for their translation? I doubt it.

How is it different from the ESV?

@craigime

5 ай бұрын

Read it and see

FYI, I just read some parts of this translation and it’s nearly identical to all the other main ones. Hence no main reason for its existence. Also it says “one day” (v. 5) and then it literally says “a second day,” third day, fourth day, fifth day, sixth day. Their entire argument of saying it can’t possibly be long-but-finite periods of time because it only lists the actual number instead of counting first, second, third, etc. is entirely moot. It only gives a one on the first day and then it counts the rest anyways even in their translation! Plus it still ends on the sixth day without showing the seventh day in the sequence which is one of the main arguments against this mandatory 24-hour-only paradigm. If God wanted to force us to believe in 7 literal days why would He exclude it and then say elsewhere in Scripture “they will never enter My rest?” Also, if you’re trying to avoid theological bias you certainly don’t want a translation that has every single person on the team not only a single denomination but even working for a single seminary and having signed a rigid doctrinal statement. That isn’t even wise. There is wisdom and safety in a multitude of counselors!

@itzcaseykc

4 ай бұрын

For starters, God did not inspire this author to create a new or updated version of the NASV. It came from a different spirit altogether. Even in the Hebrew scriptures, it says there was a seven day (Yom) week designating a literal day, with the Sabbath/Shabbat closing the end of all that God made the previous six days. God does not force His ways upon anyone; everything is a choice. He merely says, "If ye love Me, keep My commandments." That's been His challenge from the start. When we obey out of love, He will protect us against the evil what surrounds us moment by moment.

LSB was "translated" by 12 people, all on staff at Master's Seminary. So much for a diversity of thought. Basically it is just a re-hashed NASB with very slight changes from what I've seen.

@alexleal9941

5 ай бұрын

So, you have actually read parts of the LSB and compared it to the NASB?

@cmhanson

5 ай бұрын

@alexleal9941 Mr Chou clearly states in the beginning of the video that this "Legacy" is the legacy of the New American Standard. So @OkieAllDay is correct saying it is a "re-hashed NASB.

@fzr1000981

5 ай бұрын

"Diversity" speaks like the world....irrelevant....the issue is trained scholars

@OkieAllDay

5 ай бұрын

Yes, I have compared the two versions. @@alexleal9941

@Learningthetruth7

5 ай бұрын

See above. King James bible was a government project to eradicate from the bible references to opposing evil leaders. @kjbiblestudy2603

Does the Calvanist bent of Dr. MacArthur influence the translation?

@tomtemple69

5 ай бұрын

the KJV has a "Calvanist" bend to it too 🤣🤣

@howardparkes8787

4 ай бұрын

no, the original language has been accuratly and faithfully translated in the LSB. its a good translation.

Thankyou Ken for carrying on the solid foundation you taught us with your videos you used with the teachers {mainly science teachers in Hamilton NZ in the 70 s & 80 s } Seeing so many of us solidifying and using the old and new requiring Gods word , Jesus teaching and the HOLYSPIRIT to knit it all together. I do not go though a reading without finding that both parts can be separated leaving a deeper PEACE in all what i am learning of our Wonderful Maker Thankyou Ken for the new foundation Encouragement with Genesis.

Ken Ham: If one of the translators of the ESV rejects those Biblical truths then I'd like to know why Answers in Genesis offers the ESV as one of the translations to use with your ABC curriculum?? I'd like to know because this is what we use in our Children's Church.

@craigime

5 ай бұрын

Because the ESV is an accurate translation. So don't worry about it

@clelladams2326

4 ай бұрын

ESV is awful

@rstewart316

4 ай бұрын

I recall they made a big deal about having their curriculum available with the ESV at the time. Did they not know of the issue with one of the translators? I read somewhere that many of the same people work on each new translation. If that's true, why would each translation change renderings?

@craigime

4 ай бұрын

@@rstewart316 "many of the same people work on each new translation" Source: trust me bro

So what we have is a bible translation which you are thrilled to say is endorsed by John Macarthur. May the Good Lord have mercy on us all.

@Bigfoottehchipmunk

5 ай бұрын

Who cares. I am sure there are some people you respect who like it too.

@tupapisoyyo676

5 ай бұрын

How about you read it for yourself

@chirho777

4 ай бұрын

I agree. If one googles john macarthur most say he's a false teacher.

@Bigfoottehchipmunk

4 ай бұрын

@@chirho777 Ask God, not Google. He is is a human being who seeks the Lord. Those will always be criticized.

@austinlightner3973

4 ай бұрын

So what's wrong with him? "Most" say Christians are wrong... since when is most our standard... most "christians" arnt saved...

How would you compare this to E-SWORD

Thank you, exciting news!

I am saddened to see that we, as Christians, are getting divisive over something that was intended to bring unity. I am no bible scholar, but neither were a lot of the disciples. God can use anyone He wants to accomplish His purposes, and He is sovereign over it all, including the making of new bible translations. Do not put your trust into your opinion on which translation is the best, because the heart is deceitful. It is wise to always consider at least 2 translations, especially when using a translation that is phrase by phrase, or even message by message (The Message) We are all in the same boat, we are all sinners, and it does not become us to demean one another's opinions or thoughts. Mr. Ham seems excited about this translation, and I rejoice to see people still committed to wanting to pursue a more accurate Bible translation. We all could benefit from the perseverance and determination of God's people to confidently stand upon His word as the ultimate truth. Let us put aside all envy, and slander, and hypocrisy, and stand together as God's children. As one commentator said in the comments, about Bible translations being pitted against each other, I have this to say: Then why do you pit yourself against other believers? If we cannot even love one another well in sharing opinions, how will we be able to stand against the enemy, if we cannot obey one of the most important commands given by our Saviour, Jesus Christ, that we love one another as ourselves. I love and care for you all, but I do hope we begin to consider that our opinions, are sometimes in need of prayerful consideration before they are said.

@capnjs

3 ай бұрын

Jesus did not come to bring unity! “For I am come to set a man at variance against his father, and the daughter against her mother, and the daughter in law against her mother in law.” Mat 10:35 The BU$INE$$ of “retranslating” (modifying, changing, watering down, culturally adapting…) the Bible has brought more people into apostasy and immorality than any other thing! For where do you think this objection comes from, and by the way, it is the most common objection to the Gospel: “It’s been translated thousands of times, and we simply don’t know what it really says any more… like a big game of telephone.. how can we trust a Bible that we don't even have? The originals are gone and no one speaks those languages!” The King James Bible, faithfully translated into English by the best translators in the greatest empire in the world under budget of a King-preserves the word of God! There is no other faithful answer to this question. Believing God can create the Heaven and the Earth, raise himself from the dead, but NOT preserve his word in the international language of BU$INE$$ is simply a faithless proposition! The international language of BU$INE$$ is English BECAUSE OF the King James Bible!!!! And take heed! We are in a time where the “time of the gentiles” is coming to an end-judgement will be poured out on a great Nation that has TURNED AWAY from the Bible!! Daniel 9-12! May God Bless all who read with the wisdom and understanding of his Word, in Jesus’ Name, Amen!

@capnjs

3 ай бұрын

@@craigime "retranslation" is put in quotes for other versions because a different base text was used, even though they are presented as not doing so! KJB also was not done for purposes of professional "scholarship", aka pick your own meaning, 'yea hath God said', like the new ones! When the intro of the new "retranslations" claim lineage from the King James and Tyndale, this is a bold faced lie that is used to fraudulently legitimize them to would be users of the King James Bible. In fact they use a completely different base text, heavily relying on a few Greek manuscripts which show serious signs of anachronicity! In fact there is no new version anywhere that uses the same original language text throughout. Even the New King James uses so-called "critical text" readings on virtually every page! (In the margins it says CT) The history of preservatoon behind the Received Text and the Ben Chayim Tanakh knows no comparative equivalent, or even a close competitor. The fictuonal, theoretical "septuagint" is again only represented by primarily two manuscripts (Sinaiticus and Vaticanus) which contain srious anachronisms in both text and artifact! The only reason you attemot to smear the character of Ruckman is because uou cant afford to address his arguments--they refute the obvious and many lies of the "textual critic" camp, who have ushered in a period of apostasy in the West that has allowed unprecedente dmoral degradation in once Bible based civilization--leading to its inevitable and quickly approaching destruction! "Ye hath god said..." has become an anthem of those seeking to undermine the Bible and everything it stands for--fairness, truth, morality--all are usurped by the cultural marxist ehos favorite two phrases are: "Ye hath God said..." and "That's Racist!"

@BuddyServes

3 ай бұрын

Learn Hebrew, then and only then will you know what God expects of you.

@capnjs

3 ай бұрын

@@BuddyServes the New Testament was written in Greek! What are you smoking! You act as if translation can’t be accurate! If translation can’t be accurate, how can I even “learn” Hebrew? I would have to learn the English equivalents first! How would I go about doing that? -A Hebrew lexicon or concordance… most of which are compiled by aligning Hebrew words to their translations in the King James Bible! You act as if Biblical Hebrew can be known today, but it couldn’t be known 500 years ago when William Tyndale translated the Old Testament! Or 400 Years ago when the King James Translators put together the 1611 AV! Are you claiming to be a better scholar than they? Let’s put your credentials up against theirs-you’ll barely hold a candle!

@AriannaMulholland

3 ай бұрын

@@capnjs We must be careful to not assume we understand where someone is coming from in their responses. This post is not meant to slander each other or one up each other. In Ephesians, we are told that we have been united through the shed blood of Christ, and getting mad at each other over supposed credentials doesn't reflect this in the least. No one is better than another, we have all fallen short of the glory of God and are destined to hell apart from the saving grace of Christ's death, burial and resurrection. Please, stop causing division over this. I don't want to argue, I want to be reminding us of the truth, not shadowing the truth with fallible man's opinions.

So how much money are they charging for this one!! Interesting about KJV stood for 300 years and no one will be charged for copyright laws?

@louistart1173

5 ай бұрын

$18 Walmart

@craigime

5 ай бұрын

You know the KJV used to be copyrighted right?

@joeyscara7732

4 ай бұрын

400 years! I agree.

@1corinthians15.1-4kjv

4 ай бұрын

@@craigime Stop lying!

@craigime

4 ай бұрын

@@1corinthians15.1-4kjv where's the lie?

I love the LSB. I just hope they come out with a bigger font size at some point.

Yes! Thanking God for your faithful ministies!!

The King Jane version was accurately written, but because of the printing press from the 1500s was used and you had to handle each letter. Some spelling had error. Also when they wrote the king James Bible they wrote with a Gothic style writing, which did not read well for the average person that was ignorant of the style of writing, it took about 70 years to correct all the spelling and then write it in writing that every English reading person could read it

Legacy Standard Bible is translated from the NASB, a Roman Catholic Bible that was based on Codex Vaticanus and originally from the Alexandrian Text as opposed to a Codex Sinaiticus. The translators for the Codex Vaticanus were not obviously Christians and were likely Jewish scholars in the Hellenistic period.

@sunnywayPS34

5 ай бұрын

what are you saying??? that the NASB is translated from a roman catholic bible and the legacy bible is too? what??

@codelessunlimited7701

5 ай бұрын

@@sunnywayPS34 NASB is Codex Vaticanus, there are resemblance to Codex Sinaiticus but not part of Majority Text of Greek Byzantine that was used by common early Christians.

@jdc1264

5 ай бұрын

@@sunnywayPS34no he is not correct on this. Ignore him. Avoid him

@Captain-rg8mv

5 ай бұрын

Obviously you weren’t aware that Erasmus who compiled the Textus Receptus which was the Greek text consulted by the KJV translators was a Catholic. Further, the base text for the KJV was the Bishops Bible which was a translation of the Latin Vulgate. Your idol the King James Bible is rooted in Catholicism.

@suzannakoizumi8605

5 ай бұрын

​@@Captain-rg8mvI believe the Catholics got it right.

How does LSB translate Duet 32:8-9 ?

I’ve read the NSAB95 for decades and I love it. Always have. If I don’t know the meaning fully I reserve, ask, and dig in. Helps me remember what God is saying. Very colorful translation.

Why is the word 'baptism' in its various forms in the LSB? Why did they not translate it rather than using the transliteration?

@OneHighwayWalker

5 ай бұрын

What did they use? Trying to understand your concern.

@toferg.8264

5 ай бұрын

Probably to avoid controversy.

@thomasmcquaid6036

5 ай бұрын

They did not translate it at all. It is a transliterated word. @@OneHighwayWalker

@OneHighwayWalker

5 ай бұрын

@@QuietlyContemplating I agree that "immersed" should have been used. Unfortunately, caring what people think, i.e., people pleasing, will always cause bigger problems. Better for the believing community to have growing pains hearing the truth than to compromise. Shalom!

ARE YOU SURE . HE is smarter than those of 200 years ago ???

@craigime

5 ай бұрын

Who is "HE"?

I am looking forward to reading it.

The most important question to be answered, which family of text is this Bible based upon? Majority or Minority? Textus Receptus/Received Text? Also how many committee's were assembled and dedicated to specific books of the Bible? Or was this sort of a one man show.

@craigime

5 ай бұрын

It was not one man, but the committee was very small... the NT was based on the NA28

@TheGateKeeper001

5 ай бұрын

@@craigime critical text, or higher critical method of Westcott and Hort. Nestle-Aland or NA28. This text type (Alexandrian) the antithesis of the Antiochian or the Majority text which was the text of the Reformation. All such competing texts were attempts to undermine the text of the Reformation. Scratching my head why Hams folks would choose a minority, largely Vatican manuscript.