King James: Myths, Truths, and the KJV Bible

[@gclmedia]

Want to see more Bible comparisons? Check out the entire Geneva Vs. KJV Playlist kzbin.info/aero/PLDeCxlE5-BANXdkaVsIwHER70GyL4_cer&si=fejdltCujDjMewgf

[@kristentaylor34]

I honestly like to read the older versions..

[@gclmedia]

Anything Pre-1885 are my preferred choice.

[@ForTheKingdom3]

Yet another good word... You're proving that we all need to dig a little bit deeper before making claims.

[@gclmedia]

Man of man what a thoughtful comment! Thank you. That’s exactly the goal-encouraging all of us to dig a little deeper into the history and context before forming conclusions. The truth is often layered, and understanding those layers can transform the way we see the Scriptures and their history.

[@kristentaylor34]

Just curious where can you get a 1560 Geneva bible? most places i looked dont have that particular one usually i find a later version geneva bible

[@gclmedia]

Great question:! It really depends on your budget. I deal exclusively with 316 Antique Bibles. Here is a link to a 1596 Geneva Bible 316antiquebibles.com/product/1596-geneva-bible-new-testament/ If that is more than what you are looking to invest a Facsimile is the way to go. Order this one amzn.to/40sBITN

[@SonofDavid0814]

Well Done my Brother! Very well done

[@gclmedia]

Thank you so much, my brother! I truly appreciate the encouragement-it means a lot. Let me know if there’s a topic you’d like me to cover next! Have you seen ‘Did King James Ban the Geneva Bible?’ kzbin.info/www/bejne/pZ23pHqZj76rjsksi=5LhW0G6LC5XYJF0e

[@pre-pachroniclesbychristin1800]

This is so good! I’m subscribing…

[@gclmedia]

Blessings and thank you so much for your kind words! I am so humbled that you Subscribed. It truly means a lot to hear that the content is informative and impactful. If there’s a specific topic or question you’d like me to dive into, let me know-I’d love to explore it with you! Have you seen this one Did King James Ban the Geneva Bible? kzbin.info/www/bejne/pZ23pHqZj76rjsksi=5LhW0G6LC5XYJF0e

[@ricksteen935]

Dude, have you ever thought about doing an updated version of this work in more up to date language? One of the reasons that I rarely pick up my KJV is the language being difficult to understand so I read LEB, ESV and for most of my reading JB Phillips NT (few verse numeration). It just reads easier.

[@leobaldwin8414]

Those versions are missing verses. 17 if I remember correctly

[@ricksteen935]

@ that’s exactly why I keep my KJV handy

[@gclmedia]

Great question, and I completely get where you’re coming from! The language of the KJV can feel challenging because it reflects the early 17th-century English it was written in. That said, its poetic and literary beauty is why so many still cherish it today. As for an updated version, that’s an interesting idea! There are actually modern translations that aim to retain the KJV’s style while updating the language-like the NKJV or MEV. Have you checked those out? I also love that you’re exploring translations like the ESV and LEB. And JB Phillips NT? That’s a fantastic choice for clarity and flow. Maybe I could do a video comparing the readability of different translations. What do you think? Thanks for the inspiration!

[@gclmedia]

Great observation! The difference in missing verses between translations is such an important topic, and it often comes down to the source manuscripts and translation philosophies. For example, newer translations like the ESV or NIV rely on older manuscripts that weren’t available when the KJV was translated, which is why some verses might be omitted or moved to footnotes. I’m actually planning to do a video diving into this topic soon-breaking down why these differences exist and what they mean for us as Bible readers. Stay tuned, and thanks for bringing this up-it’s such a great discussion!

[@gclmedia]

Absolutely! The KJV is such a trusted favorite, and I completely agree with keeping it handy. I do most, if not all, of my reading and studying from the KJV as well. For Old Testament studies, I sometimes reference the JPS, and for New Testament insights, I love turning to the Aramaic New Testament. It’s amazing how much depth we can uncover by comparing these texts. How do you use the KJV in your studies? I’d love to hear!

[@lizmadura777]

Love the tshirt!❤😂

[@gclmedia]

Thank you! Glad you noticed it-it’s my favorite, I wear them all the time! It’s actually inspired by by my nickname. Appreciate the love! What’s a shirt or design you’d love to see featured? Have you seen the t-shirts I designed?

[@lizmadura777]

@gclmedia i had no idea you designed them. Hooe to get one sometime

[@geraldfranklin]

Master Teacher...Teacher us sir😮

[@gclmedia]

I try! Thank you for such kind words! It’s truly humbling to be called a Master Teacher. I’m here to serve and share as much as I can.

[@19snoopy64]

Another interesting Video.

[@gclmedia]

Thank you so much! I’m glad you found it interesting. Was there a specific part that stood out to you or something you’d like to dive deeper into? I always love hearing what resonates most with viewers!

[@19snoopy64]

@@gclmedia The allegations of homosexuality were interesting. I didn't know that. It also interests me that you pointed out that the loudest voices aren't necessarily telling the truth. We always should be aware of that.

[@christopherweston116]

Good evening, sir. What do you know about the name James being used instead of Jacob or Yacov?

[@gclmedia]

Blessings! Yes, they’re essentially the same name. The name James comes from the Greek Iakōbos, which is the Hellenized form of the Hebrew name Ya’aqov (Jacob). Over time, as the Bible was translated into Latin and then English, Iakōbos evolved into Jacobus in Latin and eventually James in English. So, James and Jacob share the same origin and meaning-it’s just the result of linguistic adaptation over the centuries.

[@thechristianpodcastingnetw8458]

Did you know that every single version of the Bible in its first print had 80 books??? Except for the 1560 Geneva Bible, which was the official Bible of the Protestant Reformation and it had the exact same Canaan as the Ethiopian Bible... Did you also know that this idea that it has to be in your Bible to be scripture is only a western idea??? Did you know that there are many books that are not in the Ethiopian Bible or other Orthodox Bibles that are considered scriptures by all Orthodox churches???

[@gclmedia]

You’re bringing up some fantastic points, and I really appreciate you sharing this insight! It’s true that many early editions of the Bible, including the 1611 King James Bible, contained 80 books, with the Apocrypha included in a separate section. However, the 1560 Geneva Bible did not have the same canon as the Ethiopian Bible. Like the 1611 KJV, the Geneva Bible included the Apocrypha, but the Ethiopian canon is much broader, containing books like Enoch, Jubilees, and others that are not part of the Geneva Bible or most other Western Bibles. This is an important distinction, as each tradition approaches its canon with unique theological and cultural perspectives. You’re absolutely right that the idea of 'it has to be in your Bible to be Scripture' is more of a Western concept. Many Orthodox traditions, like the Ethiopian, Armenian, and Greek Orthodox churches, recognize additional books as Scripture that aren’t found in the Protestant or even Catholic canons. For example, did you know that although the Ethiopian Bible includes 80+ books, but other Orthodox churches have their own variations? I think this is a fascinating to explore the differences in how various Christian communities define and use Scripture. Your comment has sparked such a great discussion! Would you like me to explore these ideas further in a future video?

[@thechristianpodcastingnetw8458]

If this was really his goal then he should have left the 88 books from the Geneva Bible in there when he translated them, and also included the other scriptures from other cannons that have been left in the dark

[@gclmedia]

You bring up an important point about the Geneva Bible’s 88 books and the broader question of which texts are included in different canons. To clarify, King James didn’t personally translate the Bible or decide which books to include-it was a team of 47 scholars working with specific source texts and following 15 rules he set. These rules emphasized faithfulness to the original languages and avoiding contentious commentary, like that found in the Geneva Bible. The 1611 King James Bible contained a total of 80 books, which included the 66 books of the Protestant canon and the 14 books of the Apocrypha in a separate section. While the Apocrypha was not considered divinely inspired Scripture by Protestants, it was included for historical and educational purposes. The later exclusion of the Apocrypha from many Protestant Bibles came decades after the 1611 edition, largely due to evolving theological perspectives and printing cost considerations. It’s also important to note that other traditions, like the Ethiopian Orthodox Church or the Eastern Orthodox Church, include additional scriptures in their canons, showing the rich diversity in biblical texts across Christianity. These differences are fascinating and worth diving into! Maybe I could do a video on how and why certain books made it into or were excluded from various biblical canons. Would that interest you?

[@davewhitehead135]

Could You Explain That To KJVO?

[@baez8639]

The King Jimmy debate is tired. Let’s talk about the Schofield Bible… ehh ehh??

[@gclmedia]

The King James debate is still vital because so many misconceptions persist, and it’s important to set the record straight. When it comes to the Schofield Bible, while influential, its dispensational theories have been widely critiqued for lacking solid biblical grounding. I’d love to explore both topics further to help build understanding. What’s your take?

[@nickjones1314]

Why dont we apply this type of scholarship to the snake talking to the lady that was created from a rib of a man. Why do we put energy into dispelling myths about man but dont put any type of effort about dispelling myths about talking animals? Selective Scholarship at its finest.

[@gclmedia]

That’s a really interesting point, and I appreciate you bringing it up! The account of the serpent in Genesis raises big questions, and there’s definitely room for deeper scholarly exploration there too. In fact, I write heavily about all the instances of talking animals in my book God's Garden. Many Bible readers interpret these passages symbolically, while others view them literally, and both perspectives have sparked fascinating discussions over the centuries. When it comes to topics like King James, the focus here is on clearing up historical misunderstandings because they often impact how people view the Bible’s credibility. But I totally agree that the story of the serpent-and other talking animals-deserves the same kind of thoughtful analysis (which I believe I do and have collectively. Would that be something you’d find interesting?

[@nickjones1314]

@@gclmedia Generally Speaking: History is accepting the past based on facts and evidence. Mythology is accepting the past solely on faith because there are no facts nor evidence to support the claim. Is the Creation Story historic with real evidence and facts or is it mythology and can ONLY be accepted solely through faith? And if this story is symbolic then what is the historical account of this symbolic story? IF you have the time please answer and if not point me to where you may have addressed these type of questions. Happy New Years

[@thechristianpodcastingnetw8458]

Too bad he didn't consult the unadulterated Ethiopian Bible

[@gclmedia]

The scholars who worked on the 1611 Bible didn’t consult the Ethiopian canon, because they were deeply committed to using the texts and manuscripts available to them at the time. However, it’s worth noting that the Ethiopian Bible wasn’t widely known or accessible in Europe during the 17th century, which makes its canon even more intriguing today for comparative studies.

[@roninbaltao9248]

King James a Freemason?