What I have found is that the vast majority of Greek and Hebrew scholars always make me feel that because I do not read Greek and Hebrew like THEY do that I should not even try to study the Bible at all. I like the King James Bible because it was put together for the common farmer - peasant like myself. I only know English. I feel the words put on the pages by the translators that put it together are the best possible words for the present times. Whether it was put together 400 years ago, or 40 years ago.
The lack of comments here and on other of your videos by James White fans first indicates you hit the target and second that the truth really isn't the issue for them.
Excellent series! I watched all 12 parts, and it completely destroys the critics arguments in using the KJV 'preface to the reader.' The scholars own homemade 'criteria box' is now being unpacked and the tables have turned against them in their own argument. I have not had the time to do this research, but I am so glad brother Ross did, it saved me a lot of time. Thank you, sir, you did an outstanding job. I have added some of his information to my book on the King James Bible debate and my blogs. Due to Dr. Ross' extensive research and scholarly abilities, I have turned over to him the most updated information to him on the 'umlauts' (dots) in Codex Vaticanus, of which the scholars are trying to sweep under the rug. The info on this is being censored, nor is it being advertised by the critical text camp; that is the reason hardly anyone knows about them. Hopefully, Dr. Ross will follow up on these Byzantine variation markers (almost 800 of them) that are found in KJV/TR/BYZ readings that Vaticanus either omits or changes. (Note: I John 5:7 has 3 dots FYI, not the standard 2 dots such at Ephesians 3:9). I added to my book under online endnote (8b) in chapter nine Dr. Ross' series on RU-vid and especially part-11. I strongly encourage all of Dr. Ross' followers and viewers to share this series with friends and family and spread the word of this fallacy that the modern scholars are using about the KJV preface to the reader, along with the 'KJV is Archaic' criteria box of their own making. Thank you, Dr. Ross, for your research! I have not to this day come across a better presentation of the entire CONTEXT of what the King James translators actually said. Many blessings to you and yours. Bro. Mike
I gave a thumbs-up, not because I am KJBO but because of the excellent manner this person professionally exposed the holes in White's "arguments" - White does this all the time and not just in this debate. His tactics are tiring. Nice work here and I will be going to your other videos. Subscribed also.
@@johnmurdock5710 don’t take my word for it. See the prophecy in Psalm 119:95-96. It clearly states that the wicked tried to destroy God’s word. But the testimonies of God came out in 1995 and were made perfect in 1996. 1 perfect word of God full of his testimonies, written in 1995. Psalms 119:95-96. His sheep hear his voice and when I read the NASB I clearly hear his voice!
I was reading the preface the other day... quite interesting and these man were true man of God... they quoted a lot of scripture in there and explained a lot. They also seem to be against the early concepts of abortion too... I also learnt recently that King James wrote book warning people about witcharft and tobacco...
Why some have problems with Reasoned eclecticism. I John 5:7 is found in a majority of the Latin, but not the Greek so out it goes. Good will towards men Doxology in Matthew Without cause God manifest in the flesh Are a majority in the Greek but not in the Latin, so out they go The PA and Mark 16:9-20 are a majority in both the Greek and Latin so out they go. Even the “not yet” found in the two of the earliest(P66.P75) in John 7:8 some throw out. If as an orthodox Christian you don't see a problem, what would you see as a problem?
