Тёмный
No video :(

Three reasons I stopped reading the KJV, and you probably should, too!  

Digital Theologian
Подписаться 881
Просмотров 1,2 тыс.
50% 1

If you enjoyed the video, go ahead and hit subscribe!
Here are three reasons why I stopped reading the King James Version (KJV), and you probably should, too!
The King James Bible is beautiful in its language, but should we read it exclusively?
Reason One: English has changed since 1611
Reason Two: The KJV isn't the original Authorized Version
Reason Three: The Dead Sea Scrolls get us 1,000 years closer to the original
Leave a comment letting me know what translation you prefer or if you have questions about any specific translation.
As always, thanks for watching!
You can support the channel through Patreon here: / digitaltheologian
This video is not sponsored, but I may earn commissions for purchases made through the links below. As an Amazon Associate, I earn a small amount from qualifying purchases.
Best Bible Study Tools for Beginners:
Grasping God's Word - amzn.to/3ryy9u4
IVP New Bible Dictionary - amzn.to/3EjUaUQ
An Exhaustive Concordance for the Bible you use:
NIV - amzn.to/3Mc1aFy
ESV - amzn.to/3RDPqfO
For Everyone Bible Study Guides:
New Testament by N.T. Wright - amzn.to/3CBYBJI
Old Testament by John Goldingay - amzn.to/3SSZdj6
Spirit Hermeneutics by Craig Keener - amzn.to/3SUv1UY
Video Gear:
Camera - BMPCC6k - amzn.to/3RDn716
Lens - Sigma Art Lens 18-35 f1.8 EF (Canon Mount) - amzn.to/3ykRgvn
Microphone - Rode Pod Mic - amzn.to/3RyVbvf
Soundboard - Rodecaster Pro - amzn.to/3rDUFl3
Video Switcher/Livestreaming Capture Card- ATEM Mini Pro - amzn.to/3SG9fED
Lighting - amzn.to/3rCVMBu
amzn.to/3CxskU2
Digital Theologian: 2,000 Years of Analog Theology for the Digital Age
Get your FREE 40 Days with Jesus reading guide: mailchi.mp/e79...
Subscribe if you enjoyed the video.
Photo credits:
By Grauesel - Photo taken by Grauesel, CC BY-SA 3.0, commons.wikime... Single cave in the hillside
By Berthold Werner - Own work, Public Domain, commons.wikime... - People walking over "city" of Qumran
Photo by Tim Wildsmith on Unsplash - KJV BIBLE in the thumbnail

Опубликовано:

 

17 авг 2024

Поделиться:

Ссылка:

Скачать:

Готовим ссылку...

Добавить в:

Мой плейлист
Посмотреть позже
Комментарии : 71   
@stephenbarnigham5192
@stephenbarnigham5192 Год назад
The king James of 1611 has been ordained by the Lord! And it is PERFECT FOR ITS ONLY PURPOSE WHICH IS SALVATION!
@DigitalTheologian
@DigitalTheologian Год назад
Hey Stephen, thanks for taking the time to comment! I’m glad you are reading the Bible and drawing close to the Lord. We can certainly agree that it has been written for our salvation. As to the KJV only being valid, I have a couple of questions: 1. Why aren’t the original languages the “ordained” versions to bring salvation? 2. We’re no English speakers saved prior to 1611? 3. Where does the text of the Bible say the book itself is perfect? I think we often shift the focus to the text when it should be on the author in this regard. 1 Cor 13:10 in context doesn’t refer to a book (which was still being written and compiled), but rather to Jesus, the perfect one, who has been promised to return. Thanks again for taking the time to watch and comment on the video.
@casey1167
@casey1167 Год назад
@@DigitalTheologian The belief the KJV was "re-inspired" is heresy, and is not the majority opinion of the KJV community. The proper view of the KJV is it is a correct translation of correct manuscripts which now contain words which have become archaic or changed in meaning. The period between 1611 and 1769 refined to text of the KJV to a point were outside of words becoming archaic no further revisions are needed.
@DigitalTheologian
@DigitalTheologian Год назад
Thanks for clarifying the position.
@damarrbrown4915
@damarrbrown4915 Год назад
I like to own a King James. I do like the NKJV . I like to read from the NASB and the CSB
@DigitalTheologian
@DigitalTheologian Год назад
@Demarr Brown It's good to read a variety of translations. I hope the video was helpful in providing a few reasons to consider a modern English translation over the KJV.
@TheNinjaCoffee
@TheNinjaCoffee Год назад
Hey Michael, just a random commenter passing by. I do agree with you in saying the KJV 1611 is harder to read for the modern reader (Thank goodness for the 1769 update) However, I would say the KJV (1769) is worth the read and study due to its accuracy and that it's faithful to the received text. Most "modern" translations are based on the critical text, and they do a faithful-ish job in translating based on that text. Fortunately, the dead sea scrolls support the KJV. Therefore, the KJV is more trustworthy in that department. We don't have to sacrifice accuracy for readability. But rather, let the scriptures change us, rather than us change them. Praying for you brother.
@DigitalTheologian
@DigitalTheologian Год назад
Thanks so much for taking the time to watch and comment. I’m with you on letting the Scriptures change us! It’s part of the reason I spent the time to study Greek, Hebrew, and Aramaic. I wanted to get as close to the original as possible. Thanks for the info on the 1769 KJV. I’ll have to look into it a little more.
@J3MOdh3NOWX3S
@J3MOdh3NOWX3S Год назад
I would suggest the companion bible, or Strong's accordance. It really helps understanding hebrew and greek words and phrases used in the bible.
@DigitalTheologian
@DigitalTheologian Год назад
Those are great recommendations for studying the KJV! E.W. Bullinger (who wrote the notes for the Companion Bible) was a well respected biblical scholar in the 1800s using the best resources he had available. Before I learned Greek and Hebrew, I used the Strong’s all the time. In the Bible study software I use, I still use English texts that have Strong’s numbers linked to every word. It allows me to pull up a Greek or Hebrew/Aramaic dictionary with the touch of a finger on my phone. We live in amazing times! Thanks for watching!!
@rickandkarenpeterson9790
@rickandkarenpeterson9790 Год назад
Interesting. Makes me want to know more. What about the NKJV? Thanks so much for your videos!
@DigitalTheologian
@DigitalTheologian Год назад
I’m glad you enjoy the videos ;-) My understanding is that the NKJV was aiming to update the KJV working from similar original language texts rather than taking advantage of the older manuscripts that have been discovered through archaeology since the 1600s. If I’m wrong on that, I’d love someone to link a source here in the comments.
@casey1167
@casey1167 Год назад
My preference for the KJV is probably unique, and actually has nothing to do with Critical Text, Majority Text, or language. In fact, I would love many of the words in the KJV changed. I would appreciate your thoughts and rebuttal as iron sharpens iron. The issue with modern translations post 1947 is the Law. 1. As of 1947, 17 U.S.C. 103: "The copyright in a compilation or derivative work extends only to the material contributed by the author of such work, as distinguished from the preexisting material employed in the work, and does not imply any exclusive right in the preexisting material. The copyright in such work is independent of, and does not affect or enlarge the scope, duration, ownership, or subsistence of, any copyright protection in the preexisting material." 1a. From legalzoom: "However, there have been numerous court cases interpreting the law, which complicate things and render this definition incomplete. There must be major or substantial new material for a work to be considered copyrightable as a derivative work. The new material must be sufficiently original and creative to be copyrightable by itself." 2. Based on a review of the top ten modern Bible versions, there is not a single chapter in the Bible were there is not a change of meaning, or "contributed authorship," based on decisions of translation or underlying choice of text. The changes cannot be explained based on new information or advancements in scholarship because many of the same experts work on numerous translations in the last decade. 3. Because the "preexisting material" at this point is voluminous based on the number of translations in existence today, new "material contributed" by the organization seeking a copyright based on "Formva" has to by default make changes which impact the meaning of passages of scripture which have little or incorrect textural basis. 4. Although it can be argued "no doctrine is impacted" by the changes being made, just one glance at a Thomson Chain Reference Bible tell us the Bible is interwoven to a point where a change here and there does impact other scriptures. "As it is written" or a variation of this, appears in the Bible over 50 times. The vast majority of the New Testament is quoting or referencing the Old Testament, either in the Gospels, Paul's writings or Words of Christ. Therefore, we cannot accept a modern translation of the Bible under US Copyright post 1947 because the changes in translations are based in part not to "godly scholarship" but on the requirement to legally apply for copyright under US Copyright law which is a perversion of the Bible. To believe otherwise takes a level of faith inconsistent with reality. They have rendered unto Caesar what is Caesars. Your thoughts as to why I am incorrect in my opinion?
@DigitalTheologian
@DigitalTheologian Год назад
That’s a publishing question that I had not considered before. It’s one step down the line from any work I have done personally. I have translated passages and short books for classes and my own study, but I have never attempted to get any of that work published. Do those same laws apply to translations of ancient foreign language works? I don’t know the legal code here. While a certain percentage of changes would be necessary for copyright, I think different translators could account for enough of a difference in many cases. Even when the same scholars are working on a translation, they are not always translating the same book of the Bible. This allows for a certain degree of variation. Language shifting over time would allow for some minor variation as well. I don’t believe we need as many translations as are currently available and find some of the most recent translations done by individuals (or small groups) problematic…the Passion sets a potentially dangerous precedent. However, I am glad that updates are being done to “older” modern translations like the NIV. I may not always like the changes, but I prefer to see updates and ongoing engagement because archeological discoveries are still being made that shed light on Scripture and new manuscripts might found that are helpful. Thanks for coming at the question from a fresh perspective. I hope my response helps.
@casey1167
@casey1167 Год назад
@@DigitalTheologian "Do those same laws apply to translations of ancient foreign language works?" --- First translation would be all original authorship of translation, after that further translations would be derivative works because what you are doing is already in public use. When it comes to the Bible, after the Matthew's Bible of 1537 the idea of a "new translation" is a joke, you are just making modification to an existing work. "Even when the same scholars are working on a translation, they are not always translating the same book of the Bible." --- No, they are signing off on the work as a whole when they put there name to it. And no one is "translating a book" they are modifying existing verses, the verse structure is not in the Greek/Hebrew but the existing work they are modifying. "I think different translators could account for enough of a difference in many cases" -- Nope. If you think about it you will realize that is not realistic. Masoretic Text is pretty stable even considering the Dead Sea Scrolls, Septuagint, Peshitta and other issues. I should be able to look at any Bible and see very few changes based on underlying text issues. I should also see very, very few changes to meaning in any verse because Hebrew speakers (Jews and Gentile scholars) have been the keepers of the OT English translation for the last 500 years at minimum. Can you really say with a straight face the following variation is realistic for "translations" all done in the last ten years: Genesis 3:16 ESV - Your desire shall be contrary to your husband, but he shall rule over you. CSB - Your desire will be for your husband, yet he will rule over you. NLT - And you will desire to control your husband, but he will rule over you ISV - since your trust is turning toward your husband, and he will dominate you. And it is like this in every chapter of the OT. The rational reason is the Translation owners followed the law related to "new authorship" like they said they did in their application for copyright. The irrational reason would be we don't understand Hebrew and low and behold, we have enough changes for copyright purposes.
@murielleg3948
@murielleg3948 3 месяца назад
Which Bible versions are based on the Dead Sea Scrolls?
@DigitalTheologian
@DigitalTheologian 3 месяца назад
Most modern translations are based on the insights from the Dead Sea Scrolls. NIV, ESV, NRSV, NLT, etc. all use the Dead Sea Scrolls. The exceptions I know of are the New King James (which uses the same foundation as the KJV and updates the language for modern audiences) and the Passion Translation (which I strongly discourage anyone from using for several reasons. One reason being poor choices for foundational manuscripts). I’m sure there are others. Hope that helps!
@murielleg3948
@murielleg3948 3 месяца назад
@@DigitalTheologian Thank you!
@chericandream
@chericandream Год назад
Enjoy this Seventh-day sAbbAth's gift of Rest IN Peace, Morning by Morning Womb!!! Praying, seeking, pondering, testing, and meditating, day and night!!! Endure to the end; ...Immersion IN sWORD Spirit and Truth withIN, everlasting TO everlasting!!! Praise TO the Most High Ab Yahu'Ah Sovereign, and all esteem TO His anointed Hebrew Son Yahu'Sha Messiah, our King, High Priest, and Intercessor unTO Life, Love, Logic, and Loyalty, for believers that "Hear Ye Him!"
@HonzaPokorny
@HonzaPokorny Год назад
Classic: "It's beautiful, I love the way sounds! But..."
@bw8384
@bw8384 Год назад
My question is, when Abraham say the ram in the Bush to sacrifice.. how the $*$^#* did he look up and behold a ram BEHIND him? Eyes in backnof head or something else the TRUTH, here. We as Christians should be about TRUTH and the Word.
@DigitalTheologian
@DigitalTheologian Год назад
Hey, b w,, if I heard an angel calling out my name, my "looking" would probably be a bit frantic and involve a lot of head turning. ;-) I'm with you in the pursuit of truth. I love the quote from Augustine's Confession, "For where I found truth, there found I my God, who is the truth itself." Thanks for taking the time to leave a comment!
@bw8384
@bw8384 Год назад
@@DigitalTheologian it it is a typo in the world... take a look at hebrew text for Behold a single ram and compare to text for behold a ram BEHIND. I think you will understand how it could happen.
@bw8384
@bw8384 Год назад
@@DigitalTheologian and that is what I mean let's not try to explain away truth via if you daw angel x could happen. Doesn't even make sense he looked up and behold he saw something behind him.
@DigitalTheologian
@DigitalTheologian Год назад
I looked at the ESV rather than going back to the Hebrew. Interesting how the ESV preserves “behind” while NRSV and NIV follow other manuscripts and omit it. Thanks for pointing that out.
@bw8384
@bw8384 Год назад
@@DigitalTheologian yeah my study of the word has lead me to online genesis lectures on RU-vid. Very enlightening thus far...
@cfisher11
@cfisher11 Год назад
The Geneva Bible actually proceeded the KJV and was said to be the first English Bible that was brought to North America on the Mayflower. Both the KJV and the Geneva were translated from the textus receptus ( Received) where as others were translated from the alexandrian text. While the alexandrian is older, many interpreters did not think it was a better text. One of the key differences interpretation is found in Acts 8:37 where Philip was witnessing to the Ethiopian. Textus Receptus translation : 37 [a]Then Philip said, “If you believe with all your heart, you may.” And he answered and said, “I believe that Jesus Christ is the Son of God.” Bibles translated from the Alexandrian omit this verse which would could lead readers to believe that Baptism saves instead of Faith first, then be Baptized.
@DigitalTheologian
@DigitalTheologian Год назад
Thanks for watching and commenting! The Geneva Bible and a couple others are older than the KJV. The history of English translations is fascinating. There were even two different versions of the 1611 KJV (which isn’t the most common KJV used today) that featured a number of variations.
@casey1167
@casey1167 Год назад
@@DigitalTheologian That is the first I have heard of two versions. I know Cambridge and Oxford are different in a few words, but two different versions?
@DigitalTheologian
@DigitalTheologian Год назад
Maybe I should have clarified that they had numerous printing errors that resulted in different texts. Editions might have been a better word.
@casey1167
@casey1167 Год назад
@@DigitalTheologian Well, typos is not versions.... for example The Wicked Bible of 1631 in Exodus 20:14: "Thou shalt commit adultery" There are lists of typos in KJV printings, either by Oxford, Cambridge, or the Barker through the "Placemakers" error in Matt 5:9 printed by Oxford in 1807. The "He Bible" in Ruth 3:15 is also famous. But here is the thing, If I read the original 1611 to you and if you were following along in a KJV printed today you would maybe catch 200 times where the word was actually different, and 84 of those time the word is "ye"
@danbratten3103
@danbratten3103 Год назад
I'm no KJVO, although it is my primary reading Bible. You had me until reason #3. I don't subscribe to "oldest is best". Paper wears out over time. So copies are made, and copies of those copies are made later. This kept on going until the invention of the printing press. Also, the so called "older/better manuscripts" which is basically 2 manuscripts (Codex Vaticanus and Siniaticus) have more discrepancies with each other in the 4 Gospels alone, then the variations of the the majority (Byzantine manuscripts) in the entire new testament. Also, I find it very very difficult to think God word keep His true words of Holy Scripture hidden for over 1500 years, especially through the reformation. Finally, the newer translations are based on texts that actually didn't exist until the late 19th century. I say this because they base on the Nestle/Alan which is upto what 30 different editions I believe. Where they take a piece of verses from this papyrus and then they take a piece of verses from this manuscript, and so on. It's a Frankenstein text. Just my 2 cents worth.
@DigitalTheologian
@DigitalTheologian Год назад
Hey Dan, thanks for watching and commenting! I appreciate you taking the time. “Oldest is best” here means closest to the original. Chances are always greater that mistakes will be made in copies over time (usually very minor). As for the manuscripts, there are over 20,000 for the New Testament alone. Roughly 5,000 in Greek, another 10,000 in Latin, and approximately 5,000 in other ancient languages (Coptic, Syriac, etc.). The Nestle Aland being a “Frankenstein text” means each verse is as close to the original as possible. That's the strength of the Nestle Aland. I hope that's helpful.
@casey1167
@casey1167 Год назад
@@DigitalTheologian But at issue one thing Dan Bratten is saying is it is not consistent with preservation the "as close to the original as possible" would not be used by the Church for 1500 years. Secondly, when Mr. Bratten mentions "Frankenstein text" what he is referring to is singular verses in the Nestle/Alan which do not appear in one single manuscript.
@DigitalTheologian
@DigitalTheologian Год назад
I don’t have an issue with a fragment of an older text being used it it contains a portion of a verse. Manuscripts are often tiny. The oldest, a portion of the Gospel of John that dates to around 125AD, is roughly the size of a postage stamp. Not all of these manuscripts contain neat breaks at verses, so scholars have to do the best they can with the texts they have.
@casey1167
@casey1167 Год назад
@@DigitalTheologian Agreed, but from a preservation context you should have at least one manuscript for which the a verse of the Word of God was accurately preserved. You are also showing faith the process is being done correctly. What really bothers TR, Majority Text and KJV people is what is being presented is "we have older manuscripts" when the reality is "we are putting together a puzzle of fragments." Also, when you dig into it, you realize the support for 1 John 5:7&8 is actually better than some of the verses in the Critical Text.
@DigitalTheologian
@DigitalTheologian Год назад
If I read you correctly, the problem is people think “complete text” when they hear manuscripts, when in reality they are small fragments that are portions of verses. I don’t want to mislead people, and I also don’t want to have to rely on the much more recent full NT/OT manuscripts that we have over using small fragments that get us closer to the original documents. We may disagree on that being the best process.
@melissanichols5847
@melissanichols5847 Год назад
Don't leave us hanging! Which Bible is your primary? Have a shopping list? You went to bed, didn't you? 🤣
@DigitalTheologian
@DigitalTheologian Год назад
That is a conversation for another video. 😉
@danielblair4413
@danielblair4413 Год назад
@@DigitalTheologian The King James Bible has the word "Study" in 2 Timothy 2:15 while the majority of all the other English translations remove the word and replace it with something else, they also remove verses while the King James Bible doesn't. I am going to reject any other English translation of the bible that removes the word "Study" from 2 Timothy 2:15 and also removes verses that the King James Bible has.
@DigitalTheologian
@DigitalTheologian Год назад
Hey Daniel, Thanks for taking the time to watch the video and comment. Rather than asking why English translations “remove” words, it might be better to ask why the King James has added them. Thankfully, we have thousands of copies of New Testament documents from the first few centuries after they were written. The translators of the KJV used the best original language documents they had available to them. With all of the archaeological discoveries of the last 400 years, we have access to manuscripts that are closer to Jesus, the disciples, and Paul than the KJV translators did. The things that are “removed” from the KJV are typically words or phrases that weren’t present in the manuscripts closest to Jesus. Does that makes sense? I can understand the hesitation to move away from a text you are familiar with, and I’m guessing a video and a few comments from me won’t change that. Still, it might be worth grabbing something like an Interlinear Bible to have alongside the KJV as you do Bible study. Thanks for your respectful comment. I love being able to have discussions like this!
@danielblair4413
@danielblair4413 Год назад
@@DigitalTheologian I watch the teaching videos of Robert Breaker (who uses the King James Bible in a rightly divided fashion), and I depend upon the Holy Spirit for confirmation when it comes to a teaching. That's how I do my studying. I'm NOT much of a reader, so I watch videos instead.
@danielblair4413
@danielblair4413 Год назад
@@DigitalTheologian Nothing has been removed from the King James Bible, but things have been removed from other English translations of the bible. That's why I trust the King James Bible over those other English translations. And nothing has been added to the King James Bible that wasn't meant to be there. God had his hand upon the King James Bible when it came to its translation, it is the only bible in English that can be trusted.
@chericandream
@chericandream Год назад
Desire TObe Counted as a Loyal Recipient unTO the Heavenly Kingdom Citizenship Everlasting! Blow the Trumpets IN Zion: ...Praise Aloud for the Most High Ab Yahu'Ah Sovereign and His 'Saving Will' Testimony ❤️. For the Love of the sWORD Spirit and Truth withIN Believers: (IN Yahu'Sha Messiah) ...Immerse One(s) Self IN the sWORD= Spirit Light of Truth IN the (verses) of the Whole Living WORD. The 'Testimony' of the Most High Ab Yahu'Ah: ...One Law -- One Justice -- One IN RighteousNess. (echad) (Exodus 12:49-50) One law shall be TO him that IS homeborn, and unTO the stranger that sojourneth among you. 50 Thus did all the children of Yashrael; as the Most High Sovereign commanded Moses and Aaron, so did they. (Leviticus 24:22) Ye shall have one manner of law, as well for the stranger, as for one of your own country: ...for I am the Most High Ab Yahu'Ah Sovereign. (His Testimony) (Exodus 20:1-4) And the Most High Sovereign Spake (All) These WORDs, Saying: (His Testimony) ..."I Am the Most High Ab Yahu'Ah which have brought thee out of the land of Egypt, out of the house of bondage. (worldly beLIEfs and IDOLatry) ...Thou shalt have no other g-ds before Me, ...thou shalt not make unto thee any graven image, or any likeness of any thing that is IN heaven above, or that is IN the earth beneath, or that is IN the water under the earth:" (Jeremiah 7:23) But this thing commanded I them, saying: (His Testimony) ..."Obey My voice, and I will be your Most High Sovereign, and ye shall be My people: (peculiar and SetApart) ...and walk ye IN all the ways that I have commanded you, that it may be well unTO you." A Time As This -- Repent -- TurnAbout (180) -- Praying often. (Matthew 19:16-20) And, behold, one came and said unto Him, "Good Teacher, what good thing shall I do, that I may have eternal life?" 17 And Yahu'Sha said unTO him, "Why callest thou Me good? there is none good but One, that IS, The Most High Ab Yahu'Ah: ...but (if) thou wilt enter inTO life, guard the Commandments." (abide, keep) (Galatians 3:27-29) For as many of you as have been ‘immersed’ inTO Yahu'Sha Messiah have put on the sWORD Spirit and Truth. 28 There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither bond nor free, there is neither male nor female: ...for ye are all one IN Messiah (RighteousNess IN the correct sWORD= Father and Son). 29 And if ye be Yahu'Sha Messiah’s, then are ye Abraham's seed, and heirs according TO the promise (everlasting). (Matthew 6:9-13) Yahu'Sha professed; “After this manner therefore pray ye: ...Our Father which art IN heaven, Righteous and SetApart be Thy name and authority. 10 Thy kingdom come, Thy will be done IN earth, as it IS IN heaven. 11 Give us this day our daily bread. (IN Yahu'Sha Messiah) 12 And forgive us our debts, as we forgive our debtors. 13 And lead us not into temptation, but deliver us from evil: ...For thine IS TheKingdom, and ThePower, and TheGlory for everlasting.” Praise and thanks TO the Most High Ab Yahu'Ah, and give all esteem TO His anointed Hebrew Son Yahu'Sha Messiah, or King, High Priest, and Intercessor unTO Life, Love, Logic, and Loyalty everlasting, for believers that "Hear Ye Him!" Morning by morning womb!!!
@annc4735
@annc4735 Год назад
You are wrong...Shame on you for making such false claims...its called Bible study.
@DigitalTheologian
@DigitalTheologian Год назад
Bless you, Ann. Thanks for taking the time to make a comment.
@casey1167
@casey1167 Год назад
@@DigitalTheologian Her comment was not very constructive.....
@lewis7315
@lewis7315 Год назад
Point number one, God the Holy Spirit shows each believer how to understand the KJV Bible .....your second point, The "Latin vulgate" was perverted by the Roman church so should be put in the trash... The Alexandrian text also was perverted by the Egyptian Arian heretics... only the KJV uses the Syrian texts... .... your third point is total nonsense, as I just said, both the Latin Vulgare and Alexandrian manuscripts were perverted by heretics in previous centuries so only the KJV Syrian manuscript was preserved by God... And God preserved His word in the English language in the king James bible... God also made English the universal language so the whole world can read God's Bible in English... .... SO all of your points are total nonsense!!! ...
@DigitalTheologian
@DigitalTheologian Год назад
Thanks for taking the time to watch and comment on the video, Lewis. I agree that the Holy Spirit absolutely speaks to believers as they read Scripture. At the same time, I think it is important for us to read in a language we understand. Most modern English speakers don’t understand 1611 English without an intense amount of study. That same time and effort could be spent learning Greek or Hebrew to much greater benefit. Just my thought. You’re welcome to keep reading the KJV! I’m happy when people are reading Scripture and seeking God.
@casey1167
@casey1167 Год назад
@@DigitalTheologian Note: We in the KJV-Only camp appear to have a lot of folks that are not good at making rational arguments. I till try to do better. ;)
Далее
Вся Правда Про Хазяевов !
41:02
Просмотров 2,2 млн
All Bible translations explained in 7 minutes
6:39
Просмотров 647 тыс.
How the Trinity verse got added to the Bible
12:53
Просмотров 501 тыс.
The Dead Sea Scrolls: Debunking Missionary Myths
23:34