The Septuagint os a mistranslated bersion of the jewish holy bible. It doesnt matter because it is mistranslated.

Was any of the apostles using the greek bible or the hebrew bible? What they had at the time was enough for them to make disciples all over the world and write the new testament. No perfect translation hahaha! Sorry but what we have today is far more than what the early church had! We keep focusing on the book and we are becoming obsessed by the book more than the person! The persecuted churched survived on one page of the bible, and quite a lot lost their lives for that one page. I know you are speaking academically, but some of your audience like me are not academics and we might understand what you're saying wrong. The problem when everybody becomes so called academic and repeat what you say without having your knowledge!

Hey my friend, why do some poeple say on the texts that it wasn't the word God but Lord , and they deny Jesus's divinity, could you tell me about that?, i'm a spanish speaker and i couldn't find content in spanish so i'm trying to understand this in english , please i need your answer really it will be completly helfpully for me , i hope your answer , God bless you .

Good teaching. I was just reading Johnnin the Greek. Helps a lot. Thank you.

“That supports the idea that there is a trinity” What a misleading comment. trinity is 3 persons, not 2. Also you completely ignored the 2nd clause of John 1:1. “Kai ho logos en pros Ton Theon” The Word was WITH God. that’s the distinction that John made. and yes, John 1:1c is qualitative. but more accurately to be translated into English, an indefinite article needs to be inserted before the noun for us to understand it with proper English. My question to you is, if you believe that John 1:1c is qualitative, then why aren’t you using the same qualitative definition for Ton Theon, as the 2nd clause very clearly states that he is with God? Also, can you give me another example of another *qualitative theos* from the New Testament. Thanks

Great history. Great use in logos. Not much help with just using the book

What do you consider the best translation..if you can't go learn greek??..and thank you for this presentation!!!.

galen??? scythians??? phoenicians??? herodotus??? Sophia??? dionysius??? osiris???

It’s gotta be KJV. Everything else is training wheels to get you ready for the real thing.

The LSB has a few doctrinally driven changes from the NAS'95 that support premillennial dispensationalism, that are a light attempt to defend MacArthur's positions in theology. The adjustments aren't technically incorrect in their renderings, but it's simply a word choice or stylistic modification.

Can i do a DMin with focus on Christian Philanthropy and mission leadership development for Asia, or must it be an investigation of scripture analysis.

Unspecified nouns, Love, Lust, Desire, Hope are nouns but they cant fit in a wheel barrow. So, meaning, not tangible and open to interpretation. A linguistic perspective. The definition of these things change from person to person and even the common definitions change over time. So the test? If it cant fit in a wheelbarrow, Its not real in the sense as solid, therefor the interpretation is open. So you need to try and figure out from context what was meant. Even that is often hard.

Do you get to keep the library or is that a subscription plan as well?

The key question is whether John is using the Greek words Theos and Theon to convey the meaning of the Aramaic and Hebrew words El, Elohim, elohim, or even the Most Holy Name YHWH. It appears that Theos/Theon most often convey El or Elohim, which makes spiritual sense. John, or our Lord Jesus Christ, uses Theoi and Theous (plural) to refer to elohim. I’m not sure where the complication lies, because He and the Father are one. In the beginning, our Holy Father, the Most High, said “Be Light,” and John clarifies this by saying: “In the beginning was the Logos, and the Logos was with Theon, and the Logos was Theos. He was in the beginning with Theon. All things were made through Him, and without Him was not anything made that was made. In Him was Life, and the Life was the Light of men. The Light shines in the darkness, and the darkness has not overcome it.” Perhaps the issue arises when we introduce extra-biblical terms like “Trinity” and rely on fleshly, soulish inferences or reasoning to define it. The problem with that approach is summed up in the verse: “The natural (soulish) person does not accept the things of the Spirit of God, for they are folly to him, and he is not able to understand them because they are spiritually discerned.”

The New World translation is fundamentally dishonest and flawed.

Everyone is completely free to acknowledge that Jesus is GOD or to deny that Jesus is GOD. One begins the path to eternal life, the other begins the path to Hell. Hint: there are only two destinations, pick one.

Ok my above friend! Please tell me why so many bible translations use the word 'godhead' at Col 2:9? { This suggests the 'trinity'} and was conveniently translated as such by 'trinity' biased men! ; theotēs (θεότης). which literally is 'divine quality'. Did not Peter use the SAME greek word at 2 Peter 1:4 where he assures Christians that they will "Share the divine nature/quality ( Theotes} with Christ", Does this suggest that Christians will become God himself? of course not! Since The Son was 'begotten' from the Father, the image, the reflection of His very being ( Col 1:15 & Heb 1:3) he is 'of the SAME SUBSTANCE as the Father [As a glass of wine poured from a bottle of wine is the 'same substance'} However the glass of wine is not the bottle of wine] This is what Constantine and his 'bishop cronies argued about at Nicea and got it completely wrong! The Son owes his life TO the Father! " As the Father has life in Himself, he has granted/given that the Son should have life in himself" Jesus own words of complete DEPENDANCE on his beloved Father. ( See John 5:26).

Greek word for 'Son'. HIOUS = a male offspring. Why use this term over 100 times to describe God;s Son both in heaven & qwhile on earth, if he is NOT God's 'offspring', son! Why use the term in the First place. Jesus stated clearly "I am ascending to MY GOD and your God, to MY FATHER asnd your Father" (John 20:17} How can any discussion of the greek meaning of 'Son' and 'Father' refer to anything differfent to the simple truth it reveals?

The true Greek words in the NT actually prove that Jesus is NOT Almighty God, the Father, but, as mentioned over 100 times in the NT that he is ther SON of GOD! This is what John was emphasising in his gospel by summing up its entire purpose! "These things have been written, that you may believe that Jesus Christ is the SON OF GOD" (John 20:31). Could it be plainer than that? Dont listen to would be 'scholars who use 'clever reasonings' ( 1 Cor 3:20}.

can't find a couple of the apps you mentioned in 2024; i will have to see if you have a more recent video

The Catholic and Orthodox Bibles use the Septuagint as their Old Testament.

οτι τρεις εισιν οι μαρτυρουντες εν τω ουρανω ο πατηρ ο λογος και το αγιον πνευμα και ουτοι οι τρεις εν εισιν

Please, tell me how accurate are those diacritical marks. Imagine if you were handed an older manuscript and asked to slowly but surely place the same diacritical marks, what would be the criteria? Would you dare to read the New testament without these?

This is something that I wanted to watch, I'm glad that I could find it here. One suggestion is to accommodate the title because it gives the impression that you are about to compare modern Greek translations of the original New Testament.

While the Septuagint can be very valuable to study more in depth some specific verses of the Holy Bible, (and it's absolutely better to leave non-authoritative books completely out of the equation), the Masoretic text remains as the main text to read the Old Testament because it is from the original Hebrew text.

God bless. Thanks for sharing your perspective with us. I did not like that book.

Video starts after four minutes

Ummm...no. There are complete copies of Matthew available for people to study. And there are videos here on YT that show that the Greeks left out AND added things that shouldn't be there. The Cochin Hebrew writings are on YT and the scholars and linguists who found and translated them explain the differences. This video has been invalidated within a year. Keep scrolling.

What if you have sex out of love and you’re not married?

You are 100% correct...I'm half Greek - My father and uncle, 1st gen American, parents from Greece spoke fluent in the language told me this about Bible translations...Said many of words couldn't be translated to English...

Compare Re 3:14, where Jesus is called “the beginning of the creation by God.”) Also, the Greek word for “all” can in some contexts have the meaning “all other,” as for example at Lu 13:2 (“all other”); Lu 21:29 (“all the other”); Php 2:21 (“all the others”). This agrees with Paul’s inspired teaching found at 1Co 15:27: “God ‘subjected all things under his [Christ’s] feet.’ But when he says that ‘all things have been subjected,’ it is evident that this does not include the One who subjected all things to him.”

Can you comment on this? When the Revised Standard Version was published, John Burgon, Dean of Chichester published a review of the work. He declared that we didn't get a revision but a new Bible. He collated Vaticanus and Siniaticus. The following quote is from his book, "The Revision Revised", pg 11-12. "Singular to relate, the first, second, fourth, and fifth of these codices, but especially Vaticanus (Vat) and Siniaticus (Sin) have within the last 20 years established a tyrannical ascendancy over the imagination of the critics, which can only be fitly spoken of as a blind superstition. It matters nothing that all four are discovered on careful scrutiny to differ essentially not only from 99 out of a 100 of the whole body of extant manuscripts besides, BUT EVEN FROM ONE ANOTHER. This last circumstance, obviously fatal to their corporate pretensions, is unaccountably overlooked and yet it admits of only one satisfactory explanation: viz. that in different degrees they all 5 Exhibit A fabricated text. Between (Vat) and (Sin) there subsists an amount of sinister resemblance, which proves that they must have been derived at no very remote period from the same corrupt original. Tischendorf insists that they were partly written by the same scribe. YET DO THEY STAND ASUNDER IN EVERY PAGE as well as differ widely from the commonly received text which with they have been carefully collated On being referred to this standard in the Gospels alone, (Vat) is Found to omit at least 2877 words: To add, 536: to substitute, 935: To transpose, 2098: To modify, 1132: (in all 7578): The corresponding figures for (Sin) being severally 3455, 839, 114, 2299, 1265 (in all 8972). And be it remembered that the omissions, addition's, substitutions, transpositions, and modifications, ARE BY NO MEANS THE SAME IN BOTH. IT IS IN FACT EASIER TO FIND 2 CONSECUTIVE VERSES IN WHICH THESE 2 MANUSCRIPTS DIFFER THE ONE FROM THE OTHER, THAN 2 CONSECUTIVE VERSES IN WHICH THEY ENTIRELY AGREE." Burgon compares Vaticanus and Siniaticus to the two false witnesses that testified against Christ. It is no wonder that so many verses are now removed from modern Bible's. How can Vat and Sin be reliable texts when they don't even agree between the two?

Well what did Jesus say about this? John 20:17 (KJV) Jesus saith to her, Touch me not; for I am not yet ascended. to my Father; but go to my brethren, and say to them, I ascend to my Father and your Father, and to my God and your God. Ok so the same writer who wrote John 1:1 testifies to us that Jesus stated plainly that his GOD is our GOD and our GOD is his GOD. Jesus is also absolutely clear about who this one true GOD, the only Most High is: his Father and our Father. If this truth has been hidden before us because we all have been confused and blinded by the enemy then I ask in the mighty name of Jesus for the breaking of this blindness as we repent that we have not truly believed that Jesus is the Son OF the one true GOD. May the blood of Jesus cleanse our sins and the power of GOD’s Spirit bring a new life out of this sin and confusion. Thank you Father for your deliverance. Be blessed and be a blessing to others. Much love, joy and peace to you!

paleo hebrew or yuddish

I use the KJV only. My church uses the ESV and after collating 5 bibles, I cannot use tarnished modern translations.

I enjoyed reading NLT, but my church encourages us to reas ESV.

Are there any differences between MDiv vs MA Biblical Studies? My intention is to depend my bible knowledge and spiritual growth. At most is to teach at church for youth and market place Christian development.

English cannot fully capture all the meaning of a Greek sentence. That's true. But ironically, you are using English to communicate that point. You are not speaking in Koine. That's the importance of a Bible translation. Although everybody would agree that no Bible translation is perfect, they are very useful in connecting people with the Gospel message. And that's a point that cannot be contradicted.

It's a very mature and educated talk. The way the interlinear translation was used in the presentation was so professional. Thank you very much and may the Lord bless you.

I think your title is there to draw views to plug your courses. But I may be wrong. Suggest you reflect on this. To diminish the value of these translations in this way for that purpose is not good if that is the case. Much better to say that there is nothing wrong with them as God can save through His Words written in them. Courses may help people seeking deeper understanding. So title can be “Do you seek a deeper understanding of the Bible?”

Cheer~~~relating to the Apostles.😊

Yahweh was the will that Created see Yahweh Jehoveh is the Creator Jesus is Creation the ingredient of creation God's direct expression ..So Jesus literally is the son of God the offspring of the Creator , everything was created through him God set his foundations his ways his laws in physics everything in spirit and he became a master worker to him ,, sits at God's right hand and yes there's a difference God Yahweh is the Father Jesus is the Son ..God Jehovah Yahweh never had a beginning, but when there was a beginning to Creation God basically made himself outside himself by Creating his son his expression the one who be closest to him one who is like God yes indeed but he is not the Actua Will that Created He is the one who Carries out the will of God

The word in the beginning is the voice of God and God created by His powerful word/voice, as let there be light and there was light 🙏 ❤ not two persons but one person with a voice and body.

As an average bible reader I read my hardcopy bible in front of my computer with bible gateway opened with 3 other bible translations. I keep and interlinear open on bible hub and it's helpful to look at what context the word is being used in different passages. I try to switch versions for each reading cycle. right now I use in this order NASB95, ESV and NKJV. I'm done with the KJV, I've read it a few times and I don't want to deal with Middle English or what ever that was anymore. The most important thing is pray for guidance, understanding and wisdom.

Some make way too much out the Bible translations. Basically, they are all good and of value. There is no reason to believe KJV only.

What's often missed in this passage is that John says the Word "was" God. This would indicate that the Word wasn't God when John was writing.

Because in order for a slave to remain a slave, they have to be an uninformed slave.

It’s not a matter of translations…it becomes a matter of delusion over delusion over delusion many decades and centuries, then we’re left with the Bible that is really lost the meaning of the Gospel and Scripture…. Let’s just say it becomes more man inspired instead of God inspired, which is not what the Bible supposed to become….Also leaving parts of scripture out is just man corrupting God’s inspired WORD…In the beginning was the WORD correct so why is man so bent on trying to change it and re -translate it in the same language after it’s already been translated??It makes no sense…Notoriety, money, because we can? Sorry I can’t read Greek or Latin…So I’ll stick to my KJV. God bless you all !!

The Jehovahs Withnesses used the KJB unit 1960 which states that the Word is God. So they are snukered

This is where I feel my intellect just doesn’t meet the requirement needed to understand what is being taught here. I mentioned 2 Peter 1:1 to who I believe to be a Unitarian based on the conversation being had and they mentioned it falls outside of the Granville sharp rule because “God” is being used as a proper name. I’m now starting to wonder if he’s conflating the Greek of the NT with the English understanding of the word “God”. Greek of the NT being a title while in modern English we use it as a proper name. A quick google search seems to prove my hypothesis. But then I find when the Greek writers would use Ho Theos or Tou Theos it’s being used as a proper name. I’m so confused. But then Ephesians 1:3 ho Theos Kai pater would have to be referring to two different persons. God and then the father if that were the case. 🤨I’ve not a clue!