Bible Version Differences

[@turkwelsch]

Great teaching my friend I have come to the understanding that this issue of the Bible is the most important in a Christian life.

[@sudhanshupatra5777]

Thank you pastor for wonderful class. May God's grace be with you always

[@barbarac481]

This is very helpful.

[@claythomas7982]

Nobody talks as fast as Justin when it comes to teaching. Keeps you on your toes.

[@robertmark3203]

Justin ... Great job...well done ... I would like to get a disk to take to prison ministry...

[@terencealbertmcbain8041]

Even Paul said that there are many that are corrupting the word of God.

[@dennisa.nelson9778]

Please slow down when giving a verse, I cannot hear many of the verses as I try to write them down before looking them up in my KJV Bible. I get so much out of your teaching sessions and I dwell on each word but sometimes I just can’t keep up with you. Thank you for your effort, it means so much to me.

[@planetruth414]

Chrome browser allows you to slow down the video speed in "Settings". :)

[@lizarb2245]

On the KZbin app you can hit the gear and reduce the playback speed too.

[@awatchwoman]

Go to the little flower symbol bottom right of the screen, click settings and click .75 speed, that works well, I have the same problem. Speakers need to slow down so we can digest the food , just like a meal, and make notes and find the verses quoted. Blessings.

[@halfstep67]

No need for him to slow down when you have the ability to slow, stop or rewind the video. The video is already 1 1/2 hour long.

[@popcorn1239]

my reply disappeared link to online bible is quickest.🙂

[@planetruth414]

Absolute truth!! I'd like to put these changes; deletions in chart form. Our adversary is so cunning.

[@awatchwoman]

They have been somewhere, will see if I can find my papers with the link.

[@ChipZo-]

Gail Riplingers book “new age versions”

[@Sam-tk6us]

​@@ChipZo-Gail Riplinger? Pathological liar and deceiver and KJV only heretic? She has been exposed for the false teacher and liar that she is. Her so called acrostic algebra is nothing but the spirit of divination or witchcraft. Even the saner members of the insane KJV only cult find her an embarrassment.

[@henrylaurel1188]

​@@ChipZo-Gail Riplinger? False teacher, wilfully ignorant, a liar and deceiver, and KJV only heretic.

[@donaldmorgan9149]

Well done Pastor. This debate touches the crux of the modernist reformation of the church from the late 1800's to the present day.

[@awatchwoman]

Thank you Justin, another good teaching, love the outlines too, I print them off for reminders of the points made. Bless you.

[@kypatriot7037]

This is outstanding! Thank you Pastor Justin.

[@BishopAnthonyMUtsey]

Awesome teaching..

[@awatchwoman]

Another consideration is Copyright, there has to be a large percentage difference in words used to GAIN Copyright!

[@Proverbspsalms]

Charles Lawson talked about that

[@Silverheart1956]

That rumor is constantly perpetuated

[@Sam-tk6us]

Copyright has nothing to do with accuracy. The usual straw man argument from the KJV only cult.

[@julielittle3820]

Thank you for this teaching. What about the NKJ?

[@weecher8956]

I looked up all major translations of Matt 4:4 while listening to this. All modern (major) translations do say, “…But ion every word that comes out of the mouth of God.”

[@Silverheart1956]

Dear @weecher8956, I looked at many English translations and I couldn't find any that had the word "ion" in Matt. 4:4. The actual word used in God Word in Matt. 4:4 is the word "ἐπί" (epi - Strongs # 1909), and it means "on, to, against, on the basis of, at." Some translations render it as "by" and some "on". Both are an acceptable translation of "ἐπί". Neither are wrong. Be Well, DZ

[@shanesettle2115]

Do you have a pamphlet or print out that I can get that shows the difference between the other versions? Thanks

[@ricardomontoya9480]

Deja voy a otro punto de comparación: como se traducen las obras clásicas? Platón, Aristóteles, traducción formal o dinámica? Como conectemos la filosofía de Platón? en una traducción formal, entonces porque en la biblia preferir otra Tenemos q respetar al autor y lo q escribió; entonces, respetemos la Palabra de Dios Muy buena explica, gracias por este video

[@weecher8956]

NIV 1 John 3:8 uses the word “devil” as well as many other places. I didn’t check other translations.

[@LetMyPeopleKnowMinistry]

Correct! About the AKJV. Incorrect! About Dispensationalism.

[@tyronegooch5251]

Thank you. This is very helpful. I ask myself, if these bibles were given to Jesus or the apostles would they use them? The answer is no. Why are we then using them?

[@Silverheart1956]

Dear @tyronegooch5251, You are correct ! If we gave any of these; The ESV, NIV, NASB, KJV, NKJV, any of them to Jesus or the Apostles, they would not used them ! Why ? 1. There was no such thing as the English language during their time. 2. They had the Scriptures in the original language, the Hebrew and Greek, so why would they want a translation of God's Word when they had it in the original language ? Be Well, DZ

[@joshpeterson2451]

Mark 15:28 isn't the only place that says the prophecy was fulfilled that He would be numbered among the transgressors. Luke 22:37 says so as well.

[@papist370]

Amen

[@lewwunderwald1]

Justin skipped many of the weaknesses of the KJV. Such as the mistranslation of hades, gehenna, and tartarus into one word "hell". The KJV even mistranslates sheol as grave, which betrays what God inspired.

[@richhunter5013]

Thank about it you don't use a Chevy repair manual , To repair your ford

[@richhunter5013]

As Satan's time grows shorter ,he is going to bring his greatest attack on God's word, From the beginning ye has God said? Yes He has said and had preserved His word for ever I'll die on this hill King James only

[@DJ-il8iv]

Riddle me this: Romans 8:1 seems to point us toward Legalism and Law. Why does Paul switch up the Free Gift of Salvation?

[@Moodboard39]

What u mean ???

[@DJ-il8iv]

@@Moodboard39 There is therefore now no condemnation to those who are in Christ Jesus, who do not walk according to the flesh, but according to the Spirit.

[@DJ-il8iv]

@@Moodboard39 I don’t always walk “in the Spirit”. Not as good as you folks I suppose.

[@Moodboard39]

@@DJ-il8iv Didn't answer my question dude.

[@Proverbspsalms]

🙄🙄🙄🙄🙄🙄😒

[@gregpierce9800]

I agree with Justine. Just one or two questions. How did the word corn get in the KJV? What happened to the word demons? It's not there any more. And just who is this prophet Jeremy? I look forward to your answer sir.

[@ReplaceYourFate]

Jeremy is the Greek to English for Jeremiah, Corn, bottles, book, wolf dwelling with the lamb vs lion etc have been there from the beginning. Don't feel bad, I fell for the one guys "Mandela effect/CERN" is changing the Bible conspiracy as well before I actually started reading my Bible. Brian I think his name is lies about the gospel so who knows what else he lies about. NUMBERS 27:18 AV1611: And this your heaue offering shall be reckoned vnto you, as though it were the corne of the threshing floore, and as the fulnesse of the wine presse.

[@Silverheart1956]

Dear @gregpierce9800, Yeah ! Great Question ! Good thinking ! The word "corn" in the KJV is not referring to what we know of as corn (Maize) today. This word is used in the KJV several times. Example: Exodus 22:6: "If fire break out, and catch in thorns, so that the stacks of corn, or the standing corn," "Stacks of corn" is the Hebrew word "גָּדִישׁ" (gadiysh - Strongs # 1430) and means "a heap, stack". "standing corn" is the Hebrew word "קָמָה" (qamah - Strongs # 7054) and means "standing grain". It is very probable that the text of the Scriptures is referring to some kind of grain, but not "corn" as we know it. Corn as we are familiar with is certainly a grain, but our corn was not an agricultural product that was known in Egypt or the Levant during the Late Bronze Age (when Ex. 22 was written). Moses would have had absolutely no idea what our corn was. Corn (Maize) didn't come to the Old World until after Columbus when the Spanish brought it from the Americas to the Old World. However the word "corn" was used to refer to a grain (tops of the ears of corn - Of wheat, barley, or similar grain) in the Old World long before maize came to the Old World. This is why you will find the word "corn" used in the Latin Vulgate (third Century) and even in the Wycliffe Bible (1382), which are both translations of God's Word before the time of Columbus and maize. The word "corn" was later used to represent the corn we know of. The translators of the KJV very probably knew of corn (maize) in 1611, when the KJV was translated. Technically, the use of the word "corn" it is not a mistranslation in the KJV. However, I suspect the KJV translators may have knew the difference between the "ancient" use of the word "corn", and the use of the word to refer to maize corn, it is probably not a wise choice of words to use to translate the original Hebrew words. Modern translations do a better job of translating this word to prevent the confusion caused by using the word "corn" in the KJV. The KJV usage of the word "corn" is an example of the use of an obsolete word in a translation. Be Well, DZ

[@gregpierce9800]

@@Silverheart1956 And I know, corn was never in the KJV. I'm 62, have read the KJV since the 1970's. The Lord's Prayer has changed in three places. The first line changed from heavens to heaven. Actually there are now, since 2015, when it started, hundreds of supernatural changes to the KJV, fulfilling Amos 8-11 and Daniel 7:25. Keep looking up, our redemption draws nigh, is even at the door.

[@Silverheart1956]

Dear@@gregpierce9800 "corn was never in the KJV." Well, the word "corn" certainly is in the KJV, but it does not mean Maize corn. "The first line changed from heavens to heaven." Not in the KJV. The Lord's prayer in Matt. 6:9, in the 1611 KJV reads: "Our father which art in heauen, hallowed be thy name." So it did not initially read "heavens" (plural). The 1769 KJV which is the edition that many people use, says: "Our Father which art in heaven, Hallowed be thy name." Once again, it does not say "heavens" (plural). The version of the Lord's Prayer in Luke also uses the singular "heaven" in both the 1611 and the 1769 KJVs. You must be confusing the KJV with the Wycliffe Bible (of 1382 AD) whihc says: "Oure fadir that art in heuenes, halewid be thi name;" It is plural in this translation. DZ

[@gregpierce9800]

@@Silverheart1956 Why does your responses look so AI? If you don't see the Mandela Effect, then you don't see it. Since 2015 the amount of times corn has appeared in the KJV has changed numerous times, going as high as 109 times. I tracked it over several years. Now it's down around 94. Are you AI?

[@toxtethogrady4610]

The Oxford Movement behind all this.

[@richhunter5013]

From Catholicism too çalvannism ,Is out of the frying pan into the fire John MacArthur is çalvannisms pope

[@Silverheart1956]

The KJV is a good translation, but is now dated because of the use of obsolete words that have changed in meaning since 1611. This loss of accuracy in the text if the KJV has caused some confusion concerning the accurate meaning of the text of God's Word. We can understand that translations of the Scriptures are pictures of what God's Word says at a specific time in history and to a particular culture, and that as words and languages change translations become obsolete and lose some of their accuracy. God's Word in the original languages (Hebrew Aramaic & Greek) does not change, but translations do. This is why there is a need for new translations of God's Word. In addition to the obsolete words used in the 1769 KJV that hinders the accuracy of the KJV. There are also translation errors in the KJV where the text of the KJV does not provide an accurate equivalent English word of the Greek text of the Textus Receptus. This is also true in the Old Testament. This is very obvious to any one who has ever compared the text of the KJV to the text of the Textus Receptus (or the Old Testament to the Masoretic Text). The NKJV is a fairly good attempt to upgrade the KJV and correct some of the translation errors in the KJV. For those who favor the Majority Text Line (specifically the Textus Receptus), the NKJV is a better choice than the 1769 KJV. The KJV 2016 is also a good alternative, but both the NKJV and the KJV 2016 still have some of the translation problems inherent in the 1769 KJV. Be Well, DZ

[@abdulazizmanaf2015]

Why r these apologists bent on preaching the Bible which is not the word of God n ignoring stark n clear contradictions n additions n omissions n continue the corrupted paganistic doctrine of Christianity instead of the true Mosaic teachings of Jesus who came to fullfill the Mosaic law not change it one bit! It is amazing how they continue relying on the corrupted verses n find ways to justify the differences! The Speech of God is His alone n is flawless n perfect! No man is allowed to correct omit or interpolate their opinions n ideas which has happenwd to the Bible! God did not sanction It! Man put it together!

[@COOTER18]

For me, I want to know what the original authors wrote. It was the original words written by the authors that were inspired by God. This teacher is not being fair - trying to say modern translations removed verses. Yes, they did - but for some reason this teacher doesn't want to get into the reasons why! If its likely to be an error - why would you want to keep it in?! And he talks about modern translations having to trust the scholars... couldn't we say - the same about the scholars who put the KJV or the textus receptus together - why should we trust them, but not modern scholars?! Its a flawed argument! And common sense tells us that older manuscripts are better / more accurate (refer to the teachers fancy timeline he used for KJV vs ESV!). 😊 The KJV is not the most accurate translation of God's word. People need to stop declaring it is. Check out Dr. James White... he knows what hes talking about!

[@dennismarlow1599]

So then which Bible do you believe is the absolute truth?

[@COOTER18]

@dennismarlow1599 Not sure there will ever be a 100% accurate version. My point is that the KJV has known errors in it, and should not be treated as the best/ only good translation. The ESV, NASB, and LSB are more accurate.

[@seaotter6811]

your definition of dynamic equiv is wrong. you are leading people into an error . even the KJV uses dynamic equiv in some areas. it actually means to convey the meaning and message of a source text in a way that is natural and idiomatic to the target language and culture. it is impossible to translate a word for word esp from Hebrew and Greek since the grammar and verb tenses do not exist in English.

[@dennismarlow1599]

With God nothing is impossible

[@gracefellowship9494]

It’s not about translating word for word, it’s about translating the message/context/doctrine.

[@gracefellowship9494]

God says his words are pure not his word..

[@Proverbspsalms]

The devil has people so caught up in “understanding” Gods word. They don’t know it’s not all about understanding- which that’s what the Holy Ghost is for anyway, that they forget it’s about the power behind Gods word. The kjv clearly says angels hearken unto the voice of Gods word. So when we speak his word angels move on our behalf , and demons hate the true word. They are tripped up by it, because it thwarts their plans. Even when a demon is being cast out of someone, I notice they tend to use thee, and thus. Why is that? Why don’t they quote the niv or the others? Because even they know the true word. Niv, and all that other crap doesn’t even register with demons. If k say get THEE behind me Satan. They understand the kjv better than we ever will on this side of heaven. Therefore- I don’t need anything except the Bible that the devil is attacking. The one you can hardly find now. The one that’s hidden in my heart, even before I got saved. The one that worked when I quoted when I got saved. The one that ran demons out of the Alzheimer’s nursing home when I read it 23 years ago. The one people lost their lives over to get it printed. The one without the witchcraft symbol like nkjv. The one that gave me peace when I quoted it at night when I could hear what sounded like demons knocking on my window. The one that nobody had a problem with 100 years ago, or even 50 years ago- and worked for our grand and great grandparents, the one that I remember easily even with a bad memory- that’s the one I’ll stick with till I die!

[@suzanneholdbrook9972]

I’m surprised nobody answered your comment. I was only thinking the other day how many courageous people lost their lives because of the KJV . Very inspiring, God bless them and you. John.

[@BillyWayneMcCann]

Should a student of Scripture, careful in their analysis, exhaustive in their diligence, conclude that the KJV could be improved upon, do you accuse that student of sin? Also, you keep alternating between “texts” and “Bibles.” Ultimately you are saying that the Holy Spirit inspired the translation of the KJV and that no scholarship since 1611 ought to be considered, including an individual saints.

[@Silverheart1956]

There is no question that the text of the KJV could be improved, and I am not just speaking of the words that have become obsolete since 1611. Every translation becomes obsolete with time, because languages change and words change meanings. However there are some mistranslations in the KJV where the English words used in the text of the KJV did not, and still do not, mean the same thing the text of the original languages mean. It is absurd that anyone would accuse a diligent student, who discovers the existence of translation errors in the KJV, or any translation, of sin. Discovering the truth is not sin. Be Well, DZ

[@PracticalBibleStudies]

I have no doubt that this pastor loves the Lord. However, this entire speech/sermon is a farce. The passages "removed" were never there. They were ADDED by men. Our problem in textual criticism is that we have far too many pieces to the puzzle. This is not a bad problem to have. Dr James White would be a great person for this pastor to debate. I would do the debate myself if our schedules aligned.

[@anthonyeusebius5834]

Sorry but you are simply ignorant of the facts No one ever thought words were added until Westcot introduced his fake eclectic greek text upon which the Nestle Aland UBS greek text is based. Worse still he was a Heretic cross dressing occultist who hated the textus Receptus so he used the proven to be fake forged Sinaiticis Then after sneaking in his fake text he made up the lie about scriptures being added to. You need to know the facts instead of the lies of snakes like James White.

[@LetMyPeopleKnowMinistry]

James White is financially invested in his modern translation. His opinions are biased and corrupt. He hold ZERO authority in this debate. You clearly ignored everything this video said because you pridefully want to believe in what you already believe in.

[@TTaylor]

The ESV puts the verses in the footnotes along with the reason it’s not printed in the text. If you believe the KJV is more accurate because it’s older, why not use the Geneva Bible or the Tyndale Bible? Or even the KJV of 1611? I think that argument is weak. If all you have is the KJV, you’ve got everything you need. If you want a more accurate translation (that is actually easier to read), you want the ESV or NASB.

[@christianprepper]

The King James and NASB and ESV are not translated from the same book. That’s the point.

[@christianprepper]

The King James is not translated from the same manuscripts as the other versions of the Bible. They are quite different.

[@TTaylor]

@@christianpreppersince the 17th century many more manuscripts have been discovered. Older manuscripts. Manuscripts that the king James translators would have loved to have had access to. But none of them are ‘quite different’. If they were, well, that would be a real problem.

[@Sam-tk6us]

​@@christianprepperThe KJV is translated from later manuscripts dedicated to the Pope. With many added uninspired verses. That is the reason modern translations translated from older more accurate manuscripts, are more accurate than the KJV. Also God always spoke in the contemporary language of the day. So why should I read a translation in archaic English where so many words have changed meaning. When God has blessed us with more accurate modern translations in English we can understand.

[@christianprepper]

@@Sam-tk6us you literally have that backwards. The KJV comes from the majority of the ancient manuscripts available. 95% plus support the KJV. The new versions comes from 3 manuscripts that yes they probably are older but they are not even close to being accurate. They have 3 manuscripts and 45 fragments that support the new versions. When the KJV was written over 5000 manuscripts supported it. Now there are like 50,000 manuscripts that support it. The three manuscripts that make up the new versions didn’t even agree with one another with entire books missing. Older does not equate to more accurate. That is a lie that continues to be propagated. Place them side by and you will see how the new versions attack the divinity of Christ, water down the gospel, attack the virgin birth and the trinity. Nearly every difference in the newer versions brings less glory to God. Sounds very much like something Satan would be in support of. No thank you sir. KJV is the English preserved word of God.

[@shayneleonard6763]

1:10:32---Ephesians 4:27. Also just want to point out that the NKJV translates the exact same text as the KJV, but is the only translation(to my knowledge) that gives the reader footnotes showing different manuscript readings. If you have a deep love or conviction of the older English words, I'd still say the Geneva Bible is where it's at. God Bless!

[@Silverheart1956]

Many Translations provide notes they help you become aware of manuscript variations. Lately I have been using the English Standard Version (ESV) and I do know it does. I have noted that the NKJV does correct some of the mistranslations evident in the KJV. It appears to be a little more true to the Text of God's Word than the KJV and updates some of the obsolete words. Be Well, DZ

[@DS-uo5ie]

Satan is the author of confusion! And I believe this is why we not only have different opinions,views and denominations, we cannot agree to be civil and loving towards one another!🤔

[@AVKingJamesBible]

There are over 700 existing manuscripts of the book of Mark. Only 2 of them omit the ending. I like John MacArthur but he is absolutely wrong on this. How sad it is that so many preachers don’t even believe the Bible that their holding in their hand.

[@Silverheart1956]

Dear @AVKingJamesBible, You don't determine truth by majority numbers. Surely you understand that the majority can be wrong. It is the same with variations in the manuscripts. If there were 1000 manuscript witness of the long ending of Mark and only 2 that omit the long ending, that would not be proof that the long ending is legitimate ! An example that puts this in perspective is the fact that the vast majority of manuscripts omit the Johannine Comma (I John 5:7) and the manuscripts that do contain it are late and suspicious. According to your line of reasoning, would you be willing to conclude that since the vast majority of manuscripts omit the Johannine Comma, then it necessarily should be omitted ? You see, it is not that simple. If is far more complicated than that. Be Well, DZ

[@5crownsoutreach]

Very disappointing talk. You are relaying the normative paradigm used by pastors, but there's a wrench in the works: there is NO SUCH THING as 'word-for-word' when translating from Greek to English. One single second of experience with the original Greek (of which Nida was an expert) will communicate that very clearly. A single Greek verb can render as many as 5-7 English words to accurately translate the semantics. Bad translations certainly exist, but word-for-word does not dictate which.

[@markrobertsministries]

Amen