King James Only Debate: Andrew Sluder vs. Timothy Berg

Apologies for the technical problems with this debate. Also a big thank you to our guests, especially Andrew Sluder who was suffering with a kidney stone through the debate and went to the ER immediately after.
Check out Timothy Berg's work: bloggingthewor...
Check out Andrew Sluder: / biblebaptistasheville
#kjvonly #debate #christianity

[@briandavisdesigns]

Oh man, I hope Berg's license to kill was approved, because he just murdered Sluder.

[@PracticalFaith]

Halfway through, but wow.. Berg knows his stuff. Impressive debate

[@williambourbeau4374]

One guy came armed (very well) with facts, data and information......one guy came with an unfounded allegiance to a a translation to the complete disregard of all other English Bible translations and translators.

[@JohnTre-u6i]

What facts? He sounds like Trump. The vellum manuscripts are garbage and were discarded. Erased and written over and chopped up. You cannot get anywhere a complete NT using them alone. The textus receptus agrees with the majority text nearly all the time. It is clear that the majority text has been and is the standard and was copied and used all the time, while the two vellum pieces of junk were found hidden in the Vatican library, in one case, and in a trash heap at a Catholic monastery. The argument isn't even close. The KJV guys err in acting as if the English is inspired and perfect. I think we need to follow the majority text in Greek and it will be sound. The TR agrees with the quotes from the founding fathers and is quite sound.

[@ihaufle123]

Wow, that was soooo one sided. If Sluder was correct, the KJV translators were helped by God to get it perfect, then no one prior to the KJV ever had God’s Word since no manuscript or version agrees 100 percent with the KJV.

[@ihaufle123]

@@somecunt6390 speaking of Rome, don't you find it interesting that the newer versions are often accused of being associated with Rome by kjv only advocates, when in reality, the TR was initially compiled by a Roman Catholic Priest? To make things even more interesting, he even pulled in from the Vulgate, the Bible used by Rome, into the KJV when he couldn't find support from Greek texts that he needed to get a clear understanding of how to translate certain passages. They are still in the KJV today. Perhaps the misunderstanding that the new versions are associated with Rome is because of Vaticanus, but that text predates the Roman Catholic church.

[@Studio54MediaGroup]

@@ihaufle123 You should read about who controls the flow of all the new bible versions (p. 45 N/A 27) and understand the associations. Read that page and there will be no 'misunderstandings' about associations. The TR and KJV come from mosty the Old Latin, Old Italic, Syriac (157 A.D) (along with other languages) prior to Jerome's Catholic Latin Vulgate of which you failed to distinguish the difference (which is several hundred years). And the KJV translators used a multitude of manuscripts not just the T.R. and in places may even have used the Vulgate, so what? The final result is a pure text by divine preservation and the providence of God.

[@ihaufle123]

@@Studio54MediaGroup Actually, erusamus was working with mainly late manuscripts that were Byzantine with some borrowed Latin for revelation. Regarding who translated the newer versions and the older versions, it's an ad hominem fallacy. It could be pointed out that Erasmus was a catholic, that passed his work to a calvanist then would eventual be translated by Anglicans, all which likely hold a very different theology then your own. And no, they were not using the older translations like the Syriac. The latin that was pulled was pulled from the vulgate. I personally believe that if something is true it would hold up on the market place of ideas, yet you never see any KJV only guys actually holding their own In high profile debates. Also, if the position was so solid why dont they ever hold public debates with secular people whom actually attack the Bible. Those who do, and actually do well, aren't those with a KJV position. The fruit of the logic seems like it always fails. The differences in the underlying text matter because you have to hold to a belief that was unknown to the early church, and certainly not found in Scripture, that God was assembling a perfect translation that would eventually find perfection in English and used translators that made choices from which addition of the tr they wanted to choose from and heavily borrowed from the work of Tyndale, then poof, all of the sudden we have it now. To put kindly, that's absurd. The Gospel writers would be shocked to know that when Jesus was Quoting the septuigent, he was actually wrong, guess Jesus should have Gone with a much later Masoretic text the KJV uses.( The discovery at Qumran proves that the LXX did infact exist before Christ human ministry on earth) Its interesting to hear people defend how the Byzantine text should be the one we use because they are the best ones ... oh except for the times the tr didn't use the Byzantine.. then it must have really just been preserved in other translations and not the greek. There isn't any constant method that builds to determine why these are the right readings; and usually just the presupposition that since the KJV has it, it must belong there.. Im curious as to the consistency of your position though, would you ever update anything in the KJV such as the phrase superfluity of naughtiness to something a bit more up to date? If you would never be willing to update anything, then any textual arguments you make, like the last guy, are really a smoke screen to the reality that its really not about the text but defending an english tradition. I do have respect for those who hold to a majority text approach , disagree with them, but at least I know they really care about the text. If your claiming perfection of the kjv, I doubt you hold to that. Those who hold to that hold to a very very new belief and are in the extreme minority on the issue--thankfully. Hopefully you are not like the last guy who would make claims about the corruption of manuscripts, but then also say we can't understand greek??? That was very interesting.... On a side note, I don't defend every new translation; I'm not a huge fan of dynamic translations like the NIV.

[@KingjamesAV1611]

​@@Studio54MediaGroup.... Amen 🙌

[@KingjamesAV1611]

"ad hominem fallacy " 😂 You sound like every other James White copycat wannabe!! 🤣 Everyone that actually studies out this issue knows exactly where you got that terminology. 😆 Ever get an original thought 🤔 I'm assuming you're Calvinist as well 😅

[@LEGASItv]

Ps: 1 in 5 people are still waiting for the Bible in their own language. 7,360 languages are spoken in the world but only 704 languages have a full Bible (according to Wycliffe.org.uk).

[@k8aik8ai]

The world back 2000 years ago was waiting for the Bible in their languages but God only gave it in Greek and Hebrew - what a mean God.

[@jamesstandifer1683]

The KJV only people I’ve met act like there’s evil in non KJV translations. I often wonder if they are just playing games to be completely honest

[@tdickensheets]

Bible before 1611 KJV 1) Tyndale in 1526 2) Coverdale in 1535 3) Matthews Bible in 1537 4) Taverners Bible in 1539 5) Great Bible in 1540 6) Geneva Bible in 1560 7) Bishops Bible in 1568

[@ISAIAHTheBook]

Well duh there is Evil. Starts from Genesis 3. Satan making Eve doubt Gods words. Moving forward, Why would the ESV remove matthew 18:11? Why not KEEP IT and ADD a footnote about it? They love that money

[@arpthirteen6713]

@@ISAIAHTheBook It says serpent not Satan.

[@bryanbulmer6716]

whats your point@@ISAIAHTheBook

[@ISAIAHTheBook]

@@arpthirteen6713 Who do you think is the Serpent?

[@cloudx4541]

Former KJVO believer here. I have never seen a KJV guy get demolished like this. The position is truly circular and based in a blind faith.

[@PurpleGiraffe9533]

Both did an excellent job! But WOW Timothy knows his stuff! Thank you both!

[@remorselesscuckslayerii8276]

Advice to brother Sluder. Take up another hobby.

[@BrentRiggsPoland]

2Timothy 3:16 All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness: The object of inspiration in this context is "all Scripture" not men. Scripture in this context is the Scripture that Timothy knew from his youth - 2Timothy 3:15 And that from a child thou hast known the holy scriptures, which are able to make thee wise unto salvation through faith which is in Christ Jesus. Those were not the autographs, nor were they any English Bible. "Is given by inspiration of God" describes the character of the Scriptures.

[@milesmcloughlin1767]

Very enjoyable debate. Is the first debate between Mr. Sluder and Mr. Berg available?

[@theydontknowmeson007]

It was posted somewhere.. I know I saw the first one and the only clip I can find is a few minutes of it on Andrews youtube page.. but not the whole thing.

[@remorselesscuckslayerii8276]

The KJV only crowd uses the exact same argument that the Geneva Bible only crowd used on the KJV.

[@remorselesscuckslayerii8276]

I beg to differ with the statement "all modern translations refer back to the KJV for reference" uh no they are using the more recent Greek texts.

[@bryanbulmer6716]

they actually have texts now that are older than kjv as well

[@tiptupjr.9073]

Most modern translation do claim to be within the King James tradition. For example on the New Revised Standard Updated Edition website, there is still a blurb stating this.

[@JohnTre-u6i]

More recent? The Textus Receptus very closely agrees with the majority text! The modern eclectic garbage was written by heretics who did not believe in the divinity of Christ and brought forth by Hort and Westcott, who were spiritualists. Heretics. They stole your confidence in God's word.

[@Airik1111bibles]

14:45 ..Joe-haunin-in-commen .. If a person is going to debate this subject atleast familiarize yourself with the evidence and history. Pronouncing the names like this just makes the kjv O folks sound silly cause it is just that...silly. I can say these things I once was ignorant but Jesus changed my heart.. I speak from my own history, as an ex kjvOnlyest. I had zero experience or understanding of textual history yet spoke with KJV "Authority " and did so with anger . That's the problem, you become obsessed with the book of King James , instead of spreading the gospel you spread a man made doctrine. That belief focuses on verses taken out of context like Psalms 12 which is talking about people having God's word to keep them through trials. They ADD the KJV BIBLE into the chapter as though it is prophecy of God. Its private interpretation the Mormons do it and the Jahova Witness do the same thing. They must abandon common sense leaping over every obstacle that gets in their way by saying "Authority " .... the straw dog runs around in circles chasing its tail. KJV only is a modern belief and an American problem. As with the pentecostal movement its all starts here. America sure springs up cultish ideals cause these issues certainly ain't happening much elsewhere.

[@ATiredMom]

I love how Timothy seeks to find truth and really see what the texts says rather than being so tied to the idea of a certain translation bring inspired that you don't even care about all the historical data. Last debate Andrew called the historical info 'fluff'. That's a sign of someone who wants to ignore evidence and history that supports our way of judging scripture because he has made up his mind.

[@freddieknapp9337]

imho, Timothy Berg clearly won the debate. Bro Sluder just doesnt have a good handle on the transmission and history of the text. That being said, I side with Sluder on Mk 1:2 and the definition of inspiration and preservation. Good debate. Lot to think about. Continuing to study!

[@calebhowell7008]

Freddie Knapp Berg literally claimed that the Bible Mark, Jesus, and Paul quotes was imperfect. No more has to be said

[@kingjamesbiblebeliever8387]

Caleb Howell exactly

[@jwatson181]

@@calebhowell7008 you missed the point.

[@JohnTre-u6i]

He won but you lost. Alexandrian texts are still trash and the Majority Text is the sound one and we don't have to believe in the nonsense of infallible English.

[@classicchristianliterature]

This is not in Jeremiah… so you can’t say he’s right about the Mark passage. Matthew 27:9-10 KJV Then was fulfilled that which was spoken by Jeremy the prophet, saying, And they took the thirty pieces of silver, the price of him that was valued, whom they of the children of Israel did value; [10] And gave them for the potter's field, as the Lord appointed me.

[@KT37915A]

I think this whole kjv only thing is interesting. I am in the belief that we should not disparage any of the translations. I think that the king James is fine, the same with all the other 8 main translations: RSV, NRSV, ESV, NASB, NKJV, NLT, NIV, and CSB. What I like about using the kjv in church is that everyone has one and a person doesn’t have to buy a new translation to match the pastoral teaching. As for a personal Bible, get one you can read and understand. I like the ESV, because it is close enough to KJV to follow along, but I don’t need a pastor to tell me what it means. To me, when a pastor has to tell me what it means, that is a trap.

[@johnortiz566]

NIV is not a translation, but a paraphrase. Big distinction.

[@KT37915A]

@@johnortiz566 After about 3 months of worrying and being concerned that I was not reading God's word, I prayed about it and I had an open heart and open mind to God hoping that he might speak to me about this and give me direction. My prayer was this, "I want to read your word, LORD. Please show me the bible that you want me to have and I will faithfully read it." After that prayer, a peace fell over me about the ESV bible that I had and was reading and I have not looked back. So, I don't care what anyone has to say about KJV or anything else, God answered my prayer and let me know that the bible beside my bed that I read every day is sufficient and that is all that I need to know. Anyone now that comes at me about KJV, is just a man's opinion, and not God's and it is totally disregarded.

[@sixteeneleven]

​@@KT37915A It seems like you live your life on feelings and emotions which is very unbiblical, why don't you just say the ESV is your PREFERENCE rather than telling people a dramatic story about how "Peace fell over you" which foundation is on emotianalism and a bodily experience rather than the truth of what the word of God says about itself. I'm sure you experienced the peace of God but to attach it to the ESV is like saying I have to live my life waiting for an experience and that's how God has to answer me. What your saying about your experience is that I am wrong for believing in the KJV because I had no experience and that your experience has caused you to completely reject the KJV. Without comparing doctrine and paralleling scripture with scripture your whole argument is revolving around YOU and your PREFERENCES and OPINIONS based off experience and nothing biblical. I highly suggest you dig back into this for textual support from the bible. I would be careful to throw the KJV in the trash and pray again and compare your Bible with the kjv and bring them to the Lord. I believe the King James Bible is the word of God because that's what is says. Psalm 12:6,7 John 6:63...etc NOT because the wind blew on me from the south while I was standing towards the north and caused a chill up my spine. please get back to me on this.

[@KingjamesAV1611]

​​@@KT37915A.... Here's just one simple proof that the ESV is wrong. The ESV says that David didn't kill Goliath...... 😳 "And there was again war with the Philistines at Gob, and Elhanan the son of Jaare-oregim, the Bethlehemite, STRUCK DOWN GOLIATH the Gittite, the shaft of whose spear was like a weaver’s beam". 2 Samuel 21:19 ESV Compare that to the KJV: And there was again a battle in Gob with the Philistines, where Elhanan the son of Jaare-oregim, a Beth-lehemite, SLEW THE "BROTHER" of Goliath the Gittite, the staff of whose spear was like a weaver's beam. 2 Samuel 21:19 KJV The KJV is correct!!! 🙌

[@KT37915A]

@@KingjamesAV1611 the brother being in italics means it wasn’t there in the original text so the translators had to add a couple words to fix the original text. To me, I don’t know if we should be changing God’s word even if it is to fix the error that was made by scribes 2300 years ago. Since we don’t know what the real original words were I think maybe we should leave it alone. Btw I think that the story of David killing Goliath was a legend like Washington cutting down the cherry tree or Washington throwing a silver dollar across the Potomac. The books of Samuel were probably written long after David and Solomon were dead and they wrote the stories to embellish their great leaders. Who knows though.

[@ianrenwick6221]

The notion that Mark misquoting Isaiah in “modern” version is a perversion of Scripture simply shows a lack of understanding regarding the manner in which Jews citied conjoined quotations involving major and minor prophets. The major prophet is always given the credit in the citation; the minor prophet goes unmentioned.

[@thelandmarkbaptistbroadcas4879]

Except the one who is given the credit actually did write what was cited so….. you’re wrong.

[@bobs3729]

Matt 2:23 “… that it might be fulfilled which was spoken by the prophets, He shall be called a Nazarene.”(kjv) Which prophet said? Matthew is crediting Sampson as a type / figure/ type of Christ with his arms stretched out crushing his enemies at the cost of his own life to save his people.

[@daveme7]

I would ask this-remember when they came out with those five volumes edited by RATorrey on the Fundamentals of the Faith? Did any of those who wrote about the infallibility and inerrancy of the scriptures make it about differences between Bible translations? The reason why I ask this is because many KJVO advocates interpret the ideals of infallibility and inerrancy as only applied to the KJV. But is that what those original fundamentalists actually teach? Thank you for whatever answer comes my way. God bless David.

[@JohnTre-u6i]

Wasn't Torrey around BEFORE the publication of the revised text? Put forth by spiritualists.

[@rickorider]

Well said Brother Andrew! Your closing statement was totally right!

[@BrentRiggsPoland]

Timothy, can I get a copy of your presentation? I've used your same argument on numerous occasions with a slightly different conclusion. I believe that Jesus would and did use the Standard version of the Scriptures recognized by a consensus of God's elect as the very word of God in written form in his day. I don't believe he used a sectarian, peculiar, private or individually preferred version of the Scriptures in his day.

[@excatholics]

Thanks for posting this.

[@TLBasham2]

berg did a great job.

[@hudsontd7778]

He seems like a nice guy but he wrong!

[@kingjamesbiblebeliever8387]

HudsonTD777 exactly

[@samlawrence2695]

The KJV position is totally indefensible. Thank God for better more accurate modern translations.

[@bryanbulmer6716]

lol, you guys are really that hard headed and prideful?@@hudsontd7778

[@TheChurchIsLikenUntoTheMoon]

@@samlawrence2695 that are revised and approved by the vatican?

[@shawndurham297]

Sluder is insane.

[@christopherlawson5290]

Godly men all kept calm

[@EDCREVIEWS]

HOW HARD is it to understand that we have TRANSLATIONS OF the inspired word of God, which was written in Hebrew and Greek ?????

[@JohnTre-u6i]

There is a sound middle position. The TR is very close to the Majority Text. It is the best translation we have. Most troubles are just with Greek words that are weak translations- of Greek compound words. We have a solid Greek NT and it does NOT include the heretical Alexandrian garbage- which came from men who did not believe in the divinity of Christ.

[@remorselesscuckslayerii8276]

Well since Moses,the prophets, Jesus,the Apostles the early Church father's used the KJV so should we.....also, other arguments for the KJV only they has been used are Gail Ripplinger with her "Acrostic Algebra" and my favorite it's because Air Traffic controllers use the English language hence giving the KJV preeminence.

[@joseenriqueagutaya131]

Good debate.The mention of Peter Ruckman made this debate really interesting.Coming out of the KJV only group who say that the KJV Bible is the standard and not original Hebrew,Aramaic and Greek.After stop becoming KJV only I came to learn that the Geneva Bible is older than KJV Bible why not use the Geneva Bible?The thing that the KJV onlyist insist is that the KJV Bible is the only reliable translation because for them the KJV Bible is a perfect translation in English and in the translation in other languages you don't translate from the Sinaiticus or Vaticanus because they are corrupt.The basis of translation is the KJV Bible really?

[@jwatson181]

This was just embarrassing for Andrew. Why wouldn't he read a bit about the topic?

[@chriscravens8318]

Berg just taught a class and everyone else took notes. The moderators, their script, and technology are all a clown show. These guys should not be allowed to moderate an argument between 5 year-olds, much less a scholarly debate.

[@Imsaved777]

We should be using the New King James Version because it is more accurate than the King James Version.

[@tiptupjr.9073]

No, it's not.

[@ronjones2266]

It doesn’t hurt to check other translations to see how another translator has interpreted it.

[@davidickes4621]

In the end, one guy has a final authority and the other does not (other than himself). I'll go with a final authority over personal preference every time.

[@kwrinn]

Stop and have a rational thought with the brain God gave you! The fact that you claim the KJV as your “ final authority” is, in fact, YOUR personal preference ...just what you were claiming you were too smart to fall victim to!

[@kwrinn]

King James Bible Believer ok. Just so I and the other readers understand your position, fully....Let’s explore you being forced because it is the only pure bible. Your position as I am hearing you seems to distinctly imply that every other Bible existing on this planet is corrupt and, therefore, you can’t use any of them except the KJV because you would be using a corrupted impure Bible, and that would be wrong...thus, it has nothing to do with preference...you are forced to use the KJV and the KJV ONLY?

[@kwrinn]

King James Bible Believer ok. Let’s make this easy. Is there ANY Bible in the world today that is inspired by God, not the anti-Christ...other than the KJV?

[@kwrinn]

King James Bible Believer ok. Let’s make this easy. Is there ANY other Bible in the world today that is inspired by God, not the anti- Christ, other than the KJV? I think the answer has to be either yes, there is, or no, there is not?

[@kwrinn]

King James Bible Believer I see. Then, since you are equipped to speak so authoritatively... Which, if any, non-English Bibles in the world today are also inspired by God.?

[@vacationsaway]

both represented their position very well

[@burtwonderstone5315]

Right out the gate Sluder used a text (Ps. 12:6-7) to claim a promise of Word preservation even though the Psalm, when read in it's entirety (context), clearly is speaking of the preservation of God's people, not a promise to perfectly preserve the scriptures. Ruckmanites are a divisive, cancerous lot in the church.

[@kingjamesbiblebeliever8387]

You’re wrong.

[@kwrinn]

King James Bible Believer Wow. Snappy come back, Chief. I think I will give you the opportunity to prove that statement using scripture, grammar, and historical fact. But, my prediction is...you will fall back on the kindergarten level of circular reasoning that brought you to the KJV Only position in the first place. PLEASE, Please prove my prediction wrong.

[@ISAIAHTheBook]

Good luck claiming you hold the word of God knowing that you don’t.

[@burtwonderstone5315]

@@ISAIAHTheBook You live in a small little bubble. The devil is the one behind the divisive and confusing lie that says I don't have the word of God. I guess walking with God for 40 years with other translations than the KJV isn't good enough for you and your KJBO ilk. #KingJamesPharisee

[@ISAIAHTheBook]

@@burtwonderstone5315 Its simple. Which Bible version is the word of God?

[@examinetheWORD1]

The hosts should have muted their mic. Their noises were distracting.

[@jonathanchaney5896]

In Matthew 27:9, the KJV does exactly what happens in Mark 1:2. Matthew says something was spoken by Jeremiah but quotes Zechariah.

[@bobs3729]

Matt 27:9” Then was fulfilled that which was spoken by Jeremy the prophet, saying,….” Jeremy?

[@jonathanchaney5896]

@@bobs3729 the KJV has two references in Matthew’s Gospel that they translate Jeremiah as Jeremy. Matt. 2:17 and 27:9.

[@BrentRiggsPoland]

Mark 1:2-3 As it is written in the prophets, Behold, I send my messenger before thy face, which shall prepare thy way before thee. The voice of one crying in the wilderness, Prepare ye the way of the Lord, make his paths straight. I haven't found the exact (jot and tittle) reading anywhere in the prophets.

[@fantasynerd8]

The KJV brother demonstrates a profound inability to hear much less respond to the arguments of his opponent

[@InfinitelyManic]

Bishops' placed 1 John 2:23b in box brackets.

[@InfinitelyManic]

I think we need to segment direct quotations, paraphrases, and allusions. Paraphrases and allusions may be mis-construed as direct quotes. Beyond that, the KJV advocate has to address the use of LXX by NT speakers and writers.

[@InfinitelyManic]

@@kingjamesbiblebeliever8387 No thank you. Ruckman was a racist, and I'm not interested in any false teachings he has declared.

[@InfinitelyManic]

@@kingjamesbiblebeliever8387 Ruckman's view of the KJV is inaccurate. Ruckman was a racist: have you not seen any video footage? As a racist, Ruckman did not love black people as he was called to do by Christ. He mocked black people. Taken together, there is no need to follow Ruckman's teachings. God has not left us without a witness; so if Ruckman taught anything that was true, others, of better character, could teach those same truths.

[@InfinitelyManic]

@@kingjamesbiblebeliever8387 You may be right. Do you concur with Ruckman's negative comments about black people and other non-white ethnic groups?

[@InfinitelyManic]

@@kingjamesbiblebeliever8387 You haven't heard profoundly racist comments? So, exactly what kind of racism have you read or heard from Rickman? So, if he uses the term "nigger" then that was only in jest; which makes it ok? twitter.com/FakeSermon/status/1257297387678240770?s=20 twitter.com/FakeSermon/status/1255900614820794369?s=20 twitter.com/FakeSermon/status/1255639523549208578?s=20

[@InfinitelyManic]

@@kingjamesbiblebeliever8387 So, you are perfectly fine with a white Christian preacher/teacher using the word nigger in a Bible class in front of an audience of all white Christian members?

[@BrentRiggsPoland]

I love the quotes of the Old Testament as found in the New Testament and concede that this MAY be proof of multiple versions being used. However, before I concede that point let me make mine: These quotes turn "the original language takes precedent" argument on it's head! Exact textual fidelity (jot and tittle) is not required for determining what is and what is not the word of God. Claiming that our English Bible has errors in it because it doesn't match "the originals" is fallacious as these quotes indicate. What now? Perhaps a definition of Scripture is in order, I present my understanding of that definition: The Scriptures are the anthology of Canonical books recognized and received as authentic by a consensus of born-again Spirit-filled believers in the vulgar language of every nation and generation unto which they have come; they are the very word of God in a written form given by inspiration of God - true in all its parts, perfect, pure, inerrant, infallible, etc. and the final authority in all matters of faith and practice. * The inspiration of God implies true in all its parts, perfect, pure, inerrant, infallible, etc. and the final authority in all matters of faith and practice. The inspiration of God is without distinction in nature and is not limited by time. * By the Scriptures, I mean the generally accepted consensus of versions, editions, and printings of the Scriptures. * The Standard Version always takes precedence over sectarian, peculiar, private or individually preferred versions or editions. * The Scriptures determine versions and editions; versions and editions do not determine the Scriptures. * The preservation of Scriptures is not about preserving exact jots and tittles, but rather the preservation of God's written authority - Sola Scriptura.

[@Pastor-Brettbyfaith]

Thank you for the video. God's best to you.

[@vacationsaway]

this point about "emulats" is new. can someone amplify?

[@Pastor-Brettbyfaith]

I am willing to debate Tim on the topic of "Codex Sinaiaticus- Is it trustworthy?" I will take the negative position. Tim can take the affirmative. I will prove why every thinking Christian should reject the ("oldest and most reliable") Codex Sinaiaticus. For the glory and praise of Almighty God, in Jesus name.

[@Oath_Keeper1979]

The KJV is not a great translation for today for the reasons mentioned here in this video. As a result it’s very simple to misinterpret KJV scriptures because of the old English. I was studying Roman 9 today and came across Romans 9:5. In the KJV it says of Jesus he is “God blessed forever”. Now compare Romans 9:5 in the ESV which states of Jesus: “who is God of all. So I would say to the KJV only crowd why the KJV translators are denying the deity of Jesus Christ by NOT saying Jesus is God?

[@countryboyred]

Nice debate

[@FaithUnaltered]

Thank you!

[@countryboyred]

@@FaithUnalteredAnytime. You guys have a great channel! Thanks for all the content.

[@tdickensheets]

The issue here is that we live in USA! We have freedom in USA read other Bible versions!!

[@tdickensheets]

King James only have show us where in there KJV that God or Jesus said "Read KJV only or go to hell."

[@colonyofcellsiamamachine6175]

my guess is peter parker was maybe reading RSV and Gwen Stacy was maybe reading the Living Bible.

[@cameronc1509]

It seems like people who argue against using ONLY the KJV wind up arguing against using the KJV at all

[@kingjamesbiblebeliever8387]

Exactly, most of them hate the 1611 Authorized King James Bible.

[@kingjamesbiblebeliever8387]

@av L be careful saying, “all” you haven’t met or spoken to every KJV ‘onlyist.’ Be careful to paint with a broad brush and generalize claims like that.

[@kwrinn]

King James Bible Believer I must point out that you chastised Cameron for using the word “all” ...which he couldn’t prove, and he apologized. However, you, KJV believer, used the word “most”. I would caution you that this word paints with a broad brush, also, and you cannot supply data, other than your opinion to back that up, either. I think Brother KJV believer owes Brother Cameron an apology like the one he was big ( honest ) enough to make

[@kwrinn]

av L you did well, brother. I understand getting tired of the Onlyist duplicity. I really don’t think we can change their minds...but if we are consistent in holding them and the KJV t9 the same standards that the Onlyist sets for those who disagree with their position and for all other translations, then The Holy Spirit is definitely able to draw them out of the darkness and divisiveness which is the KJV Only position / movement. Plus, I must admit, I kinda like pulling their collective chain. It’s just too easy. By the way, have you noticed that their rhetoric is carefully crafted to make it seem they are attacking the “modern” translations? In fact, they generally hold an equally corrupt opinion of older versions of scripture, as well. So it really has nothing to do with if it is modern or ancient or in between. It has everything to do with the fact that it is NOT the KJV. I’ve never heard one truthfully answer the question, “ If it is true, as you say, that the KJV is the only true and perfectly preserved scripture, then in what form did God perfectly preserve His word(s) in 1610; 1510; 610, etc?

[@kwrinn]

av L thank you for the spirit of your reply. It IS incorrect that the Geneva was perfect except for some spelling errors which the KJV corrected. Just as one example, one of the first editions of the KJV actually said, Thou shalt commit adultery. My point is that God breathed the original scriptures to the various writers...that is what theopneustos means in 1 TIm 3:16. All translations and every copy of the originals has errors. In fact, no two New Testament manuscripts are identical. However, less than 2 percent of the approximately 40,000 New Testament variants are have any effect on the meaning. And NONE of them affect ANY essential Christian Doctrine. These variants may cause certain proof texts to be more or less numerous, but each and every essential Doctrine is still there in every quality translation in any language. Therefore each one is the Word of God. THIS is the miracle by Grace under which God preserved His Word in such a way that the world can never argue with reasonableness that anyone has corrupted His word throughout the centuries. That, my brother, is the true beauty of the certainty that God has afforded us in His way in His time.

[@marksorenson5871]

KJV only is an absurdity

[@superproducercbiz]

Calling the KING JAMES BIBLE “unbiblical “ is a bit extreme in my humble opinion. Let’s not go to these lengths for the sake of argument.

[@bobs3729]

Controlling the language is the key. The shift on the few years is “I’m a Bible believer.” Contrasting to “Bible correctors.” Since the kjvo only believe the KJV “is the Bible” anything else is this “not.” A newer term I’ve heard is “multi-Bible-ist “ as another form of ad hominem attack. (Name calling)

[@superproducercbiz]

I like both sides of the argument. However I do think you can read according to your level of comprehension and walk in Christ. Even read the kjv and NiV side by side

[@anythingafter10]

Well done, Mr. Sluder, defending God's word. And Mr. Berg, you were full of interesting facts from history. None of them justified your faithless view of the bible; but it's probably fun at parties, until it gets tiresome.

[@StormeGoforth]

Greek and Hebrew only ohh I only know English 🤔

[@19nineteenthirteen19]

Chuck Missler has some great things to say on this topic. The bible is a supernatural message sent from outside our time domain. It is alive and active! Praise Jesus!

[@drpatristic9575]

Great video, audio sucks lol

[@CupofCloud]

Berg needs to do more of these, next with Will Kinney and then Jack McElroy. I do like both Kinney and McElroy, but they really need to debate Berg and hopefully break out of the weird kjvo thing

[@burtwonderstone5315]

Nah, Kinney is dug in on the KJBO thing like an Alabama tick. I'd love to see Sluder and Kinney debate on Calvinism/Arminianism - sparks will surely fly!

[@CupofCloud]

Yeah, you could be right. I was once KJVO myself and realized that, if one is honest in researching if the KJVO claims are true, you eventually get to a fork in the road where you double-down on the KJVO doctrine and deal with cognitive dissonance, or you simply stop being KJVO. Not saying all, KJVOs get to this fork, some will never get there because they swallow it up blindly. What's remarkable to me is that during my time (and this still is going on as we speak) of being KJVO is that they seem to have designed for themselves a system to help strengthen their confirmation bias and/or help the 'educated' KJVOs (like Kinney and McElroy, I'm pretty sure they've reached this point but decided to double-down) who've reach the 'fork in the road' deal with the cognitive dissonance they've accumulated through the years... how do they do this? what's the system? Memes. Lots and lots of memes. KJVO are CONSTANTLY distributing pro KJVO memes to themselves at an alarming volume. Sure some of them share them on their timeliness in hope to help bring about more KJVOs but whether they realize it or not, it looks pretty bad that they're constantly sharing these memes amongst themselves 24/7 Like they're trying to comfort themselves after making a decision that they're not sure about. I hope more KJVOs start getting honest with themselves and understand that if someone is claiming that 'X' Bible is the only Bible God wants you to use, then the burden of proof lies on the person making the claim. Then at that point look at the info from all sides, not just from the person trying to make you believe this.

[@burtwonderstone5315]

@@CupofCloud I've debated with KJVO's online since the late 90's and never changed a single mind (that I'm aware of). It took several years before I even realized that most KJVO's live in an isolated, closed ecosystem, which makes them completely unable to comprehend the various stripes and experiences of other sincere, God loving believers who don't subscribe to KJB onlyism. The labels they've thrown at me (alexandrian cultist, bible denier, apostate, bible doubter etc.) were initially shocking until I finally realized that I had stepped into a strange Christian sub-culture that judges all other Christians by this primary checkbox: KJ Only? Yes or No. If you select "No" you're automatically a sub-rate Christian who doesn't really love God or His word. I'll never darken the door of any church with "King James Only, Fundamentalist, Independent Baptist etc." sign on the lawn.

[@Ree7828]

@@burtwonderstone5315 You hit it right on! I was raised in a KJVO church (organization...or cult) and really had my eyes opened in my 40's when I opened up a NASV. My "ex-husband" who I was married to 37 years had the audacity to tell our 3 grown children who broke away from this belief and started using other versions that people using other versions were going to hell! These people are so headstrong and will not open their heart to see otherwise. In fact, all of my family other than my kids are still in this church (I would prefer calling it an organization...or cult) and will not have anything to do with me or my kids because we left the church. Real Christians huh?

[@burtwonderstone5315]

@@Ree7828 I'm sorry to hear that, Marie. It's really a shame that "Christians" have chosen so many paths of exclusivity over issues that there'll never be a unanimous position on. When the fundamental truth of the grace of God in Christ is no longer primary in a Christian's beliefs, and is replaced with an uncompromising dogma about the KJB, it truly is a cult-like world they're living in. I've tried for decades to convince my fellow "brothers" in Christ who are KJBO that I'm a legit Christian who loves the Lord and His word. I've given up.

[@Imagine1116]

So simple, one guy here us saying its up to man to figure out what was in the originals we don't have and the other is saying God already figured it out for us through the KJV translators. One man trusts God the other cannot trust God so he puts his trust on men. I think its easy to see who is right. "Let God be true and every man a liar"

[@ianrenwick6221]

The same tired old arguments, misrepresentations, and category errors, to say nothing about the selective eisegesis… this, in essence, is why KJVO is so dangerous.

[@kiddingme01]

Good thing King James was inspired to pick the inspired men and they picked the perfectly inspired words and it never had to be revised. However, I do feel sad for all those English speaking people who didn't have the inspired Word of God before 1611.

[@InfinitelyManic]

Some claim that about 25% of the 1602 Bishops' (the base text) was retained in the revision that ended up in the 1611 KJV.

[@kingjamesbiblebeliever8387]

D West some say you’re dead wrong

[@InfinitelyManic]

@@kingjamesbiblebeliever8387 "some say you’re dead wrong" -- I am compelled to presume that you've never studied the subject matter.

[@kingjamesbiblebeliever8387]

D West I have actually. Very extensively in fact.

[@InfinitelyManic]

@@kingjamesbiblebeliever8387 Then why do you object? What is your assessment of the KJV text that was retained from the 1602 Bishops' Bible?

[@kingjamesbiblebeliever8387]

D West the King James Bible is not a revision of any one Bible. In making the 1611 Authorized King James Bible, the translators used primarily the Textus Receptus for the New Testament and references others previous translations like the Geneva, Tyndale’s, the Great Bible and the Bishop’s Bible. The Bishops was only one of the many Bibles they compared and used. The KJV is in no way a revision of any previous translation.

[@malcolmknight345]

The debate is over the KJV is the perfect accurate preserved word of God.

[@FaithUnaltered]

Which KJV? There's more than one you know...

[@malcolmknight345]

@@FaithUnaltered really! Thanks for pointing out what any KJV supporter already knows.

[@FaithUnaltered]

@@malcolmknight345 I'm just asking you a question... Which version is the "perfect accurate preserved word of God"? The 1611 w/ or w/o the Apocrypha? 1870? 1994?

[@malcolmknight345]

@@FaithUnaltered well the one I have in my hand. Their all the same to me I know about the spelling errors of the 1611 and the standardization over time but none of those things changed context or doctrine so in my mind's eye their all perfect.

[@ora_et_labora1095]

Hey Timothy, why are you not following the commandments? 5. Thou shalt not kill

[@calebhowell7008]

Berg claims That Jesus and Paul had the imperfect word of God when they quoted scripture. Think about that! He actually believes God is incapable of preserving his word.

[@kingjamesbiblebeliever8387]

Caleb Howell yep

[@kwrinn]

I’m sorry ...I try Very hard to be civil and understanding, but that comment was stupid.

[@calebhowell7008]

@@kwrinn who’s?

[@thomasdillon777]

@Caleb He didn’t say God is incapable of preserving His word. He just demonstrated, from the KJ bible, that God was comfortable using variants. Maybe God was making a point, on purpose, that verbatim recitation is not what He thinks is important. Rather the preservation and usage of the message is what’s important. Just like the Pharisees got wrapped around the axle with the exact application of the law and not loving God with their hearts, He does not want to see Christians getting wrapped around the axle about the exact recitation of scripture instead of having a heart for God.

[@kddlporterkddlporter5679]

You can sure tell the survivor antichrist philosopher one-upping the 'schmucks' & foolishness of preaching from the plain speaking prophet with the word of God here. Now I know what drew me to the nicolaitans: idolatrous humanist pride & self-righteousness, self-help presumption that's nothing but craft. The granting of repentance not to be repented of is the prayer for all from here, but God's preserved& quick, powerful word, trumps all.

[@Mr.MacMan]

To play it safe I read only kjv and nkjv.

[@FaithUnaltered]

What is really playing it safe tho, reading a text thats based off 12 mss or a text that's based off 5800+ ?

[@Studio54MediaGroup]

@@FaithUnalteredThe TR is over 93% Byzantine/Majority according to Maurice Robinson.

[@Musteatbacon1]

I think Timothy won on a modern intellectual level referring the Sinaiticus text, (for whatever that's worth because it was most likely a 19th century forgery) but I believe Sluder proved his point on preservation and inspiration. This isn't so much a King James Bible issue, as it is a perfect Bible issue. What do you put your faith and trust in?

[@justachristiansoldier9609]

Berg's opening statement is asinine and makes no logical sense, almost a comical argument. As if when Jesus speaks He is reading from a translation, it's an ignorant premise.

[@kingjamesbiblebeliever8387]

Precisely what I was thinking.

[@ihaufle123]

I don’t think you understand what he was saying. Jesus frequently quoted the LXX, which was the Greek translation of the Scriptures they had during that time. We know this because it matches with the copies of the LXX we have today. The KJV doesn’t use the LXX, so if the KJV is the perfect word of God, why didn’t Jesus use underlying text used by the KJV in the O.T.? In the KJV N T we have O T quotes that reference the LXX not found in the KJV in many places. I challenge you to check all the OT verses quoted in the book of Hebrews and find out for yourself why they don’t match the KJV O T text.

[@kingjamesbiblebeliever8387]

@ihaufle123 no I don’t think you understand. The Septuagint is a fake.

[@ihaufle123]

@@kingjamesbiblebeliever8387 bahahaha🤣..🤨, wow I guess real dialog is over. If you deny something that is so well known by many on both sides of the argument, then it doesn't appear you are really open to the truth. Again, take the time to look at what many of the N T passages that quote the OT and then compare the quoted passages that are found with the actual passage in the KJV. Haven't you ever wondered why they don't match? If the LXX is a fake, why does the NT quote it?

[@kingjamesbiblebeliever8387]

@ihaufle123 these two videos expose the Septuagint. kzbin.info/www/bejne/eWLQmpKImLh_h5o kzbin.info/www/bejne/p2jEgIB7gKd7jck Also Dr. Ruckman wrote a book called the mythological Septuagint.

[@AsheboroHomestead]

39:03 the Syriac doesn't agree with the TR... response "in what places?". Answer, (paraphrasing) "I read somewhere that they don't because I don't speak syriac." Do any of these people know ANY foreign languages that would make them an expert on the matter of why the KJV isn't the perfect preserved word of God? If you don't speak other languages then maybe you shouldn't be condemning the KJV because.... YOU DON'T HAVE A CLUE WHAT YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT!

[@JohnTre-u6i]

Just because the textus receptus isn't based on ONE manuscript doesn't make it "eclectic". They didn't hopscotch around finding words they liked, as true eclectics to. They came up with manuscripts IN AGREEMENT with one another and used them to make a standard text!

[@FaithUnaltered]

@@JohnTre-u6i what do you mean by Eclectic?

[@bryanbulmer6716]

Andrews pride

[@Pastor-Brettbyfaith]

The original text of scripture is perfectly translated in the English translation of the KJV. To place faith in something is a work that you must do. To walk by faith is something that God gives. It is God that saves, thru His Word alone. The modern critical text changes the meaning in many of the known text variants of the New Testament. Tim argues the same argument I used when fighting KJVO folks over Peter Ruckman teachings. Modern critical text advocates try to show what is wrong with the KJV, but I will show you why you can not trust Codex Sinaiaticus.

[@19nineteenthirteen19]

Have any of the modern translations helped win souls for Christ?

[@lanceschultz4851]

According to 1 Peter 1:23-25 the answer is no. It plainly states man is only born again by the incorruptible seed.

[@jwatson181]

@@lanceschultz4851 you are espousing heresy.

[@lanceschultz4851]

@@jwatson181 So it doesn't say that Jimbo? If it doesn't say precisely what I typed then just what does it say? What sairh the scripture? I'm not interested in what you have to say. What saith the scripture?

[@jwatson181]

@@lanceschultz4851 the verse has nothing to do with translations exegetically. It is talking about the gospel of Jesus death burial and resurrection.

[@lanceschultz4851]

@@jwatson181 Says you and that means absolutely nothing whatsoever. Read the plain, simple, clearly spoken words again. You have to twist and wrest the scripture to have it say anything else. Besides I told you already, I truly don't care what you have to think on the subject. You want to convince me of anything? What saith the scriptures?

[@SuperReagan2012]

Where’s Pete Ruckman???

[@KingjamesAV1611]

With the LORD in heaven 🙏

[@johnortiz566]

There’s a huge difference between omitting scriptures and saying the same thing in another way. Practically all of the modern translations omit hundreds of texts in their bibles.

[@k8aik8ai]

but modern translations actually omit whole verses

[@samlawrence2695]

@@k8aik8ai Or the KJV translated from later manuscripts dedicated to the Pope. Had added uninspired verses added by scribes much later.

[@johnortiz566]

@@k8aik8ai I agree. That was my point initially.

[@ISAIAHTheBook]

This is what it comes down to. •KJV Only = God preserved his words •Non KJV Only = God did not preserve his words That’s literally it lol.

[@rogerjohnson833]

The KJV bible is the most accurate bible.

[@rightlydividing7607]

Sounds like Mr. Berg never read the book New Age Bible Versions, a detailed study on the agenda behind the modern versions.

[@FaithUnaltered]

New Age Bible Versions (which according to the author, Mrs. Riplinger, is a divinely inspired book) is widely considered one of the worst defenses of King James Onlyism in existence. The arguments are so poor and the mistakes so glaring that even King James Only proponent D. A. Waite wrote a book responding to her and warning people that her view is heresy. www.amazon.com/Warning-Riplingers-Multiple-Inspiration-Heresy/dp/1568480695

[@kwrinn]

Art thou infested with fleas of ignorance or dost thou merely pisseth on the wall ?

[@rightlydividing7607]

Proselytize or Apostatize That’s interesting, cause every bible version other than the KJB is pushing the same agenda when read in their context. Also, her view? All she did was compare and contrast. Don’t know why modern bible defenders get so defensive.

[@rightlydividing7607]

Kenny 4 Infested with God’s righteousness.

[@kwrinn]

Rightly Dividing It,s simple. If you check her research by actually looking up the sources she used...and I should more correctly say abused, you will find that she used bits and pieces of quotes to prove the points she tried to make. And that is not my opinion...that is fact that I can document...all one has to do is read instead of being lazy and accepting this woman’s pitiful excuse for documentation as accurate. I will put it this way. Gail Riplinger likes to call attention to her years of teaching at Kent State. If one of her students had turned in a paper with the type of manipulation of source quotes that she used, that student would surely fail and could likely be brought up on charges for violation of the school’s code of conduct.

[@SharonBalloch]

I chose the KJV because they did not change the word Unicorn because the meaning of the word changed..and thankfully neither did Science and because the fake bibles call Jesus the one and only son instead of the Only begotten Son..and they also took out that if you have a child who needs healing and you want to heal that child you are given the method to do so.. fasting and pray.. When the disciples asked Jesus why they could not take the demon out of the child Jesus said this kind of demons only comes out with fasting and pray..but some one took it upon themselves to take the words Jesus spoke away.. Since I found fasting to be the closest connection to God that I have had since I was born again I find this to be an evil thing not a mistake.. They said they needed to make new bibles because we were too stupid to understand the KJV... they lied.

[@Sirach144]

"Love them to Jesus"? We are not to convert the world now. That's what the millennium is for.

[@gileadfundythebibleexplain1285]

NO TO CORRUPTED ALEXANDRIAN TEXTS. KJV ONLY

[@jwatson181]

Why not read the NKJV?

[@samfoe]

@@jwatson181 Because it teaches damnable heresy, making salvation difficult. "Enter ye in at the strait gate: for wide is the gate, and broad is the way, that leadeth to destruction, and many there be which go in thereat: Because strait is the gate, and narrow is the way, which leadeth unto life, and few there be that find it." - Matthew 7:13-14 (KJV) "“Because narrow is the gate and DIFFICULT is the way which leads to life, and there are few who find it." - Matthew 7:14 (NKJV)

[@jwatson181]

@@samfoe Do you understand the underlying Greek text? If not, how can you judge which one is the better translation?

[@samfoe]

@@jwatson181 I can read plain English and see which one is promoting a false plan of salvation through good works instead of simple faith in Jesus Christ's finished work on the cross.

[@samfoe]

@@jwatson181 can you fluently speak Greek, to do something as simple as ordering a hamburger if you went to Greece? Most Greek scholars can't. That's like trying to translate something from Spanish to English with only a dictionary. Without basic fluency of the language how can you claim to understand the underlying Greek? The KJB translators were masters over Greek and Hebrew.