Great insight! Makes me feel more confident with the Bible we have today. Amen, I believe that God will preserve His words and prevail over those who intentionally modified some of the Bible versions for their own belief system.
May God bless you past. Bernard. Listen you give me more faith in the bible because a few day ago somebody talk about the accuracy of the Word of God and when I heard that I was disappointment about the bible but after saw this video, I can say the Word of God (Bible) is TRUE. Stay blessed 🔥👏
7:30 to 8:30 FASCINATING! Also the fact that the scroll of Isaiah translations over one thousand years 1 to 1000 C.E. were relatively the same without change to the meaning.
❤️ Study the Word of GOD ,and be presented to GOD perfected ,as a workman not shamed ,one who correctly announces the Word of GOD with Truth .2 Timothy 2 vs 15 . 🕊️
Hello Rev. Bernard, hoping you can read this. May I ask if is there any significant difference between bible versions? Does the version/translation have any effect on our understanding of the Word or does it affect the very message that God wants us to learn? Do different versions and translations deliver the same Word and intention as the original manuscript? And what bible version/s do you recommend to read and what do you not recommend? Thank you!
Acts 2:38: Then Peter said unto them, Repent, and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins, and ye shall receive the gift of the Holy Ghost. The initial sign is speaking in tongues (Mark 16:17, Acts 2:4, Acts 4:31, Acts 8:17, Acts 10:43-48, Acts 19:4-6) Jesus Christ self identifies as the Father (John 14:9) The Son (John 10:36) The Holy Ghost (John 14:16-18) The Holy Ghost is Jesus Christ in Spiritual regeneration (Romans 8:9-10, 2Corinthians 3:17, Galatians 2:20, Colossians 1:27) In Jesus Name
There is a living bible sitting next to his father that is the same yesterday today and forever. And he said if you take away from it he will take away your name from the book of life. People actually justify changing how or what GOD says. That WORD DIED FOR ME AND YOU. I KEEP IT PURE FOR IT IS WRITTEN HE DOES ALL THINGS WELL I BELIEVE HE KNEW HOW TO COMMUNICATE PERFECTLY WHAT I NEED TO KNOW TO GET ME AND THIS WORLD TO HEAVEN AND FULFILL HIS WILL. KJV ONLY
"Though the process of textual criticism, you can arrive at the original text" -- that, sir, is an assertion that is highly disputed, it is hardly the unanimous view of serious scholars. It is, of course, the cherished view of theologians whose theology DEPENDS on it, of course, to be sure.
"How we do know errors didn't creep in?" Well, we know errors DID creep in. We even know about some of them (1 John 5:7, for example), which of course makes it plainly evident that it would be irrational to say we know all the errors that we don't yet know about, and may never know -- likely, will never know.
When you write a book entitled, "God's Infallible Word", that's the biggest clue that you can't support that claim rationally -- rather than make the case and let the readers be inevitably drawn to a conclusion that is plainly evident, you recognize the need to assert it in the title. Undoubtedly, most of your readers will not be reading it critically, but purely to reinforce their existing beliefs.
The comparisons to secular texts are highly irrelevant -- it is really unsurprising that religious writings fanatically copied and distributed by fervent believers would have substantially more textual witnesses than histories of the Greeks or Romans -- and of course, there aren't throngs of people who believe their own life and death depends on the accuracy of those histories and so even if they were deeply flawed, what would the consequences be, really?
You spent time talking about the time the ancient scribes used to preserve the original Hebrew Scriptures -- that's clever because it doesn't address that THE seminal texts for Christians are in the New Testament, and the people copying THOSE letters and writings were certainly NOT of that caliber, almost EVER, until hundreds of years after the first copies of copies of copies of copies of New Testament writings reached them. And this notion that, "well, if 98 say the same thing and 2 don't, which are right? obviously the 98." Again, no, that is spurious. It is more PROBABLE that that is the case, but it is not KNOWN for certain, and you are also hiding the question of the DATE of those 100 manuscripts. If you, as many other fundamentalist literalists do, want to build heaven and hell out of "infallible, inerrant word of God", you can't do "probable", you have to have 100% certainty, and there is no rational basis to make that claim.
The "5,000 manuscripts" -- the many manuscripts argument -- for the NT doesn't really address the issue, and it's a weak argument. "If 100 manuscripts are the same, you know that's got to be the original" -- on what basis of logic did you draw that spurious, illogical conclusion? You admit we don't HAVE the autographs, but you claim that magically, the fact that many copies are the same after hundreds of years doesn't address the earliest period when it is almost certain the least qualified people were copying them.
