TEXTUS RECEPTUS, BYZANTINE, MAJORITY, or CRITICAL TEXT? MARK OF THE BEAST 666 or 616? 

Thanks Tim, this was a great time!

I’m certainly AV-preferred and I love this dialogue between you brothers and the wisdom shared. I always love to see brother Tim Frisch have these conversations because he has great wisdom on these matters.

I have a lot of respect for brother Dwayne, I like the way he will take an honest look at an issue before just writing the other guy off as questionable.

Second Edition MEV would be amazing!!! Loved the first. I may switch to it depending on what the 2nd edition looks like.

Good conversation! 👍🏻 GmaJo

I took pastor everhards advice and use kjv, nkjv, and nasb( he prefers esv). In my opinion, I believe the masoretic text for the ot, and the majority text for the New Testament are the best options. The majority text uses the majority of each word choice as found in manuscripts. The critical text uses all manuscripts to determine what the scholars believe the autographs might have said. So, there is an element of conjecture, whereas the majority text uses the manuscript evidence we have. If one uses an nkjv New Testament and “ corrects” the text using the M footnotes, I believe it gets really close to the majority text.

Love Pastor Dwayne and love that he is an NKJV/KJV guy 😁😁

Hey guys concerning the MEV, I have a question?: What version of the TR has not fixed 2Sam 21:19? Because it's not fixed in the MEV????

Sp true! Song analogy is accurate. When we are aware of "the why" we think/know something is an important starting point for critical thinking. 🙏🏻❤️

After Green's video on why our church uses the new King James how could any of us go back to the critical text after watching that?

I wouldn't touch anything that has any affinity with KJV TR. In Bible College we had to use it in the mid 80s as it was Ind Baptist. I still teach in a Ind Baptist Church (Sunday School) but use the Nasb 1977, LSB, NET, and the CSB all together. My first to go is always the Gk and Heb.

That was excellent. I’ll try not to be long. My real and only complaint about these translations is the translators have a tendency to write out what the author actually said; ie Isaiah 64:6. Generally translated as “my righteousness is as filthy rags” or ‘rubbish’ or ‘polluted garment’ etc etc etc, but we’ve known for decades that what Isaiah actually wrote was “menstrual rags.” We’ve known this for DECADES (for emphasis, not shouting) but still we see all these new editions published and it’s still not corrected. So people can discuss this to the cows come home (and I will listen because I find it interesting) but in the end my answer will always be, “the best translation is the one that reads menstrual rags in Isaiah 64:6 because that’s how the original text actually reads.” You kind of lose the finality of the statement because we’re afraid to say the original authors actually said “menstrual.” It’s the same as “Joseph knew his wife” which is a euphemism for “sex.” Now we have gobs of people who truly believe Mary was a virgin her entire life even though the Scriptures tell us otherwise.

I grew up with KJV and my church is now KJV/NKJV and the missing verses in CT based Bibles bug me too. I still own and use them but seems to me like they were removed.

Is it his about Bible texts or covid😮☹️☹️☹️☹️!

without a cause is the correct reading.

😢 brother, the first 10 minutes killing me, man. Let's get into the subject matter, 🙏

anyone who uses the critical text is calling God a liar when he said he would preserve his word.

The King James version is THE HOLY BIBLE for all English speaking people.