Welcome to the Dwayne Green RU-vid channel. The focus of discussion is surrounding Textual Criticism and things related to the Preservation of the Bible! My aim is to glorify God in the discussion of preservation and textual criticism with Brothers from a variety of viewpoints.
The Protestant Reformers gave their lives for the truth. They were the people responsible to help us have thef Bible available in our own language. What were the translations they used during the 1260 years from 538AD - 1798. Men like Wycliffe, Tyndale, Jerome, Huss, Martin Luther, Zwingle etc, the Waldensies,. Explore there a little bit and see what was the real issue, and the sacrifices they made, up to the point of sacrificing their lives for the cause.
Great message and yes, the NKJV is a very, very good translation. Also can't disagree with you as to the excessive number of English translations available today. Way too many. Could easily be whittled down to 5 or 6 without losing anything. Just my opinion.
ANYTHING supernatural or spiritual that is taken from the bible is hearsay, feelings, beliefs, hopes, and tales of imaginations, and not proven with evidence. The bible is a book mostly written by men who never even met the people they wrote about (many years after). It is also heavily edited and censored by a church that had a power and politics agenda, eliminating around 14 books (the Apocrypha). In addition, there isn't just one Christian bible - there are at least three with different numbers of chapters. There exists no provable, fact-based evidence to support any of the supernatural (spiritual) events in it. Thus, it is pure human belief - a human emotion and dependent on as many human thoughts as there are humans. To believe without factual evidence is like saying a court case should be determined by only hearsay or a feeling. It's hard to think God wouldn't hold humans to a standard that they hold themselves.
When one believes the author of this verse was Jesus and knows His lifestyle was concreted, the context means more than not eating a meal. It means total dedication and connection to God.
My go-to NT translation every time is the DBH Revised. IMO it’s the most accurate (both formal and dynamic) NT translation since the original autographs.
I'm sorry, but I'm confused, so basically you're saying that you now are unsatisfied with the NKJV, you need 100 translations to trust the bible, and the Holy Spirit led you to this? Ok let me stop myself right here
no sir, I have not once advocated for 100 translations to trust the bible... I think we have an unfortunate glut of English Bibles and I see this more as a negative than a positive and I've always said that. You'll also notice that the discussion is surrounding the Greek New Testament, not a specific Bible Translation, so I'm NOT saying that I'm unsatisfied with the NKJV. On the contrary, I'm more than satisfied with it, especially since it has the majority text footnotes (which are essentially Byzantine). What I'm saying in this video is that I don't think the TR existed in it's current form until the reformation and I don't think the reformation signaled the cessation of textual criticism.
The NKJV gets ignored a lot, maybe because it isn't the newest and shiniest kid on the block but it is SOLID and has been around long enough to have proven its worth.
Dwayne, your comments @15:20 captured my concerns in that if the pre-trib camp (which encompasses the vast majority of Western Christendom) faces the Antichrist in tribulation, what will become of them?. Most (because of easy believism and shallow biblical knowledge) will likely wither and may draw back thus fulfilling a great falling away! Lord prepare us for your return regardless of when it occurs and sustain us through that day! 🙏🏻
I like to use the NKJV with the NASB95. I favor the TR slightly because I can’t imagine the church for many years preaching added text. I think God does preserve his word. I do still think the modern translation scholarship is pretty good. I buy Concordia commentary on books of the Bible. They translate original to English and it does seem to match closest with modern translations like LSB or NASB 95 or LEB.
@@Dwayne_Green Couldnt keep your job or travel or go to concerts without the shot or the forehead mark (ye know, the nose test people shoved up their brains?) Dont worry, when the economy crash, only those with the technology delivered through the 💉 will be able to buy or sell during Digital CBDC economic system. Turns out people's ID and bankaccount is going to be inside them, yay. Try thinking 5 years ahead buddy.
Always enjoy your videos. As I have stated before, I dont lean to one family of manuscripts or text types over the other. I do have a little more issue with the TR as it has more from the Latin inserted into it. But when I look to translations, I love the NLT and the NKJV. When I read the NLT verses 44 and 46 are footnoted so you can still read them and of course the NKJV has the verses in the text. I also do look at what the World English Bible (WEB) reads because it is a Robinson Pierpont Byzantine Priority Text. I also read the 1599 Geneva Bible, daily verses from the ESV, CSB and NASB 95.
It's not original it was added that is a proven undeniable fact just because it says something you agree with doesn't mean it's supposed to be in there think of how much is true in the Apocrypha but yet the King James doesn't have it anymore because it's not canonical
I love that this work is being done, but it frustrates me that access to some of these documents is restricted. But yes, thankful some people are working on this.
Thanks for this, guys! There’s this one text where I’ve really not understood how the rendering came about. In 2 Peter 1:1, most Greek text bases, and English versions call Jesus “our God and Savior.” The KJV instead has “God and our Savior,” and even Scrivener’s TR has an additional “our” in his Greek text. No idea what happened there.
It would be interesting to see Adam debate Dr James White, or Tony Costa on the Byzantine vs the Critical text. Have you seen the debate between Tony Costa and John Tors, The critical text vs the majority text, on RU-vid? It would be interesting to see you review that debate.
Perhaps Christians need to get together and raise enough funds that we can purchase these restricted documents from their controlling athiest owners. But yes, at least these restricted ones are going some way to being preserved.
I like statistics! This might not be done till my Grandkids I dont have yet are retired, but someday, they could click a button and see results that take a lifetime now. It will be a gift for the people of the future. Im not saying the result will change scripture. Rather, people will know what they are talking about when they throw manuscript numbers around.
I used to work in the insurance industry and when I left we were just beginning to apply AI to reading paper applications. It won't be long now until AI is able to read minuscule manuscripts. If I had to guess... 5 years AT MOST. So I think it will be done long before your grandkids!
@@Dwayne_Green That would be great! I definitely cannot read miniscules. I have been slowly working through a book to learn Koine Greek over the last couple years, and at first I would pull up manuscripts to practice reading or to look something up, and if I clicked on a miniscule I would be like, "woah! What language is that!?"
Very interesting Dwayne. I must point out that going by the methods of the Critical and Majority theorists we still don't have God's Word since we havn't really looked at all of the manuscript evidence out there. We note that the Critical theories (which include yours, could change with any further discoveries made here). Yet, the one method that doesn't need all the evidence looked at is the faith based, biblical based method of the TR position. We assert that we have God's Word and the People of God have indeed always had it. Add to this, all the manuscripts that have been destroyed or buried etc. It only multiplies the problem.
I saw yesterday that the INTF announced they'd added 10 new manuscripts from the Mount Athos monasteries on the Liste. They also said they'd reached about 5700 catalogued manuscripts from 43 countries. The Mt Athos monasteries make up about 18% of their total, so if I'm doing my maths right, they account for roughly 1000 of their total catalogued texts. I'd love to know exactly how many GNTs and LXXs are there - they list about 15,000 manuscripts between the 21 monasteries, but by their own records most seem to be non-Biblical texts.
