Three Myths about King James Bible

[@RyanReevesM]

Oh hi everyone! I'm back.....check out my new book that came out last week! amzn.to/2MtmSYY

[@Yesica1993]

IT'S ABOUT TIME!

[@stevenwiederholt7000]

Ryan Reeves You were gone? :-)

[@RyanReevesM]

Steven Wiederholt Rude! :)

[@stevenwiederholt7000]

Ryan Reeves Somebody has to be the skinny old wise guy. I do have decades of experience in this regard.

[@doug1863]

Ryan Reeves its a true pleasure and privilege to have you back and to be able to hear your new lectures

[@KTChamberlain]

I know I mentioned this in your lecture on Anglicanism and King James, but it bears repeating, because there was a parallel that recently occurred to me. In 2007, I got my grandfather the King James version of the Bible for his last birthday, unaware that he had the same birthday as King James VI/I: June 19. Like it was meant to be. What's even weirder is that I recently found another striking parallel between the two, theologically speaking. My great-great-great grandfather, John Peacock Wood (1818-1899), immigrated from England and joined the Mormon Migration; he and his descendants were Mormon until my grandfather broke the tradition when he became Lutheran. King James's forbears were Catholic until he broke the tradition in being the first Anglican king of Scotland in 1567.

[@KTChamberlain]

I'll look into that and let you know if I am. If I am, that will blow my mind even more.

[@gregb6469]

Isn't there a Stuart somewhere who still claims to be the rightful King of England?

[@KTChamberlain]

I don't know, but what I do know is that my grandfather never claimed to be him--his last name wasn't even Stuart, it was Wood.

[@tommyodonovan3883]

Mormon or Moron?

[@dozog]

It hardly bears repeating.

[@rosstemple7617]

As I started studying the Bible in its original languages I truly believe they should have left some words in the original language. The English falls short on word definitions. Like the word obey being used for a woman and child. Children are to harken their parents. Women are to respect man as their head as to the orderly arrangement of God. So if the man as head doesn’t follow God a woman has no need to follow his leadership. The Authority is God. Man is head only by following God’s Word.

[@hyacinthbarrett214]

😊😊😊😊😊😊😊😊

[@gregory6402]

Bullshit sounds less like bullshit in English

[@rosstemple7617]

@@gregory6402 just a very basic search from a Strong’s concordance shows they’re two different words for obey. Col 3:20 Children, obey your parents in all things: for this is well pleasing unto the Lord. Obey here is: G5219 (Strong’s #) hupakouō From G5259 and G191; to hear under (as a subordinate), that is, to listen attentively; by implication to heed or conform to a command or authority: - hearken, be obedient to, obey. Wives obedience: Tit 2:5 To be discreet, chaste, keepers at home, good, obedient to their own husbands, that the word of God be not blasphemed. G5293 (Strong) hupotassō From G5259 and G5021; to subordinate; reflexively to obey: - be under obedience (obedient), put under, subdue unto, (be, make) subject (to, unto), be (put) in subjection (to, under), submit self unto. Women submit voluntarily to their husbands, not just because God committed it that way, but also because women are the weaker vessels. So wether by authority or carnal nature women should submit to a point. If you deny the spiritual order, then deny natural order the only obedience left is that of the demonic realm. Women aren’t slaves, they’re help mates. A man doesn’t follow God’s laws, then she has no reason to follow her husband. The tasso in hupotasso is an orderly arrangement. G5021 (Strong) tassō A prolonged form of a primary verb (which latter appears only in certain tenses); to arrange in an orderly manner, that is, assign or dispose (to a certain position or lot): - addict, appoint, determine, ordain, set. God bless

[@alanthompson5208]

what are your thoughts on 1 Peter 3?

[@wolverinejordan5976]

AMEN!!!

[@getyasum9365]

There is a age old saying that loosely goes as such..... "History is written by the victor and history is filled with liars". Read your bibles and trust what your hear and mind tells you the best you can and let your conscience be your guide. May God bless us all and have mercy on our corrupted, sinful souls. For God is humanity's one and only hope for a truly pure and just existence, James Thompson.

[@mattmacaulay2900]

THE REEVES HAS RETURNED

[@proletarianwoes5568]

Absolute L e g e n d

[@rutatutut]

Only the best sounding voice on the youtubes.

[@biblereadingoutreach2284]

Proverbs 28:21 To have respect of persons is not good: for for a piece of bread that man will transgress.

[@batboylives]

The King James Bible is one of the great literary treasures our world has ever seen, especially when you consider who wrote the King James Bible, why it was written and when it was written. While it is a literary masterpiece, more importantly it is the Word of God. This is why it has endured. Not because of the commission of King James but because of the commission of God himself. Regardless of how people feel about God's word, you can be confident in knowing that God's word will endure forever. "The grass withereth, the flower fadeth: but the word of our God shall stand for ever" (Isaiah 40:8 KJV)

[@debbiekerr3989]

This video was very informative, and interesting. I have used the KJV most of my life and I really appreciate how well you explained it's origin.

[@Me2Lancer]

William Tyndale deserves a lot of credit for the foundation of the Authorized Version 1611 and Geneva Bible was the most popular bible in the colonies. The KJV translators gave a great deal of credit to King James in the front matter.

[@mickm8028]

Tynedale copied his new testement part from erasmus Greek New testement, its nearly same just English. Erasmus used Greek manuscripts he had acquired and the Vulgate, he knew there was parts added to the Vulgate and he knew his Greek manuscripts had many mistakes. He wrote about these facts. Also he admitted his version he wrote had many mistakes. Tynedale used original Hebrew for old testement part but erasmus Greek for the new testement part. King James (original) is almost same as tynedale

[@doug1863]

I ordered your book Dr Reeves. It arrives tomorrow ! Looking forward to reading it!!!!! Update. Your book is in my hand and I am about to start reading it.

[@Brandon-a-writer]

I appreciate your approach to scholarship on this topic, though I would imagine any change to a revealed word of god, however miniscule, could give rise to multiple interpretations and readings, which result in sectarianism and further division. As carefully as the scriptures have been read and scrutinized, these minor changes have the potential for major deviations in interpretation. Again, not really a criticism, rather a personal opinion on the matter. I would like to see your take on the influence of Daemonologie, and what impact, if any, it had on Biblical scholarship in the English speaking world going forward. Cheers

[@gsgidney]

Ummm.. except the fact that the KJV is about 80-90% of Tyndale Bible. Tyndale was the closest to the truth until the KJV, which had more manuscripts to glean from

[@marqueematthews4949]

The letter J was new to the English language during this time so the proves names were altered. James VI used his name the names of close relatives in place of the original figures in the bible..

[@roberttassone7676]

The letters J and V were not used in the London printings of the 1611 until 1640 15 years after James died. Cambridge University was the first to use them in their first KJV printed in 1629.

[@bebereal4278]

​@roberttassone76 CORRECT! ABOMINATIONALLY REAL WRONG. YESHUA WAS FROM GALILEE, HOW IN THE WORLD CAN MEN CALL HIM Jesus, When he was born in Galilee, spoke Aramaic/Hebrew. Satan is a LIAR, HE fooled Adam and Eve in Garden of Eden, GOD kicked them out of Eden, now, Satan has nearly the whole world 🌎 calling him Jesus, when GOD SAID, " NO OTHER NAME MUST WE BE SAVED! WAKE UP! Satan wants people to burn 🔥 in hell with him for eternity. It's a Shame he has so many FOOLED!

[@fmayer1507]

Very informative. This is the kind of video that we need more of on KZbin that really educates.

[@michaelbaughman8910]

I ask people"Do you read Shakespeare?" They answer "No" I ask "Why?" They answer "I don't understand it." I ask "What Bible do you read?, They answer "Oh, only KJV." I say "How can you understand it ? It is the same English as Shakespeare!!"

[@nasticanasta]

actually they are talking about the phrases used in Shakespeare not the words...Read Hamlet

[@gowdsake7103]

KJV the dumbed down buybull loved by Americans go figure !

[@corywiedenbeck1562]

@@gowdsake7103 dumbed down from what?

[@gowdsake7103]

@@corywiedenbeck1562 Dumbed down from Latin its not by any means the first translation but was written in common English.

[@corywiedenbeck1562]

@@gowdsake7103 latin or greek?

[@DonnaBrooks]

When you say the "RV", is that the RSV (Revised Standard Version)? Or is there some English translation of which I'm not aware?

[@mr.starfish4965]

The RV (sometimes called the 1885 RV) is the only officially recognized revision of the KJV in Great Britain. It is not very popular in the US, but I think it sort of like the UK equivalent of the ASV. Wescott and Hort were on the translation committee.

[@mikebaker2436]

Glad to have you back. I stayed subscribed for the last year hoping that you would return with fresh historical content.

[@d0g_0f_Christ0s]

The stupidity of arguing over 'English' detail is gobsmacking. I too have been caught up in onlyism so 2 days ago I went and bought an NIV, what a breath of fresh air. I've been secretly bulk reading the NLT a lot over the past 12 months. In fact, over the past 2 years (mostly NLT) I've read more bible than I have in the past 31yrs before that. NKJV/KJV is my preferred version(s) for study but I can't believe how sensible it is that God would want 'His' understood without man's 'stuff', for lack of a better word. Thank you for this history lesson, much appreciated. God bless.

[@krau0728]

My ninja, happy to see you back on da mic..

[@RockingRobby505]

Glad to see you back Mr Reeves! Your videos have been an awesome education while i watch my newborn, she loves all of the paintings and i love the content, keep it up.

[@rev.j.rogerallen9328]

I love all your lectures but I must take exception to one comment you made about Anglicanism. Regardless as to what the Vatican might say, we Anglicans very much see ourselves as Catholic and Orthodox Christians. While tempered by the Reformation we see ourselves as reformed Catholics not Protestants.

[@RyanReevesM]

Rev. J. Roger Allen Yes it's worth maybe adding that I mean in the context of the 16th century there is no appeal to being Catholic, the wound being fresh and the church wanting to remove itself from the papacy. (No appeal is ever made to Orthodoxy.) But since then the Reformation for many Protestants became about throwing everything out not simply reforming them. So Anglicans came to find their voice in affirming historic truth. In short: I agree with you but I have a habit of describing things in their day. For me, the stress is how students tend to read BACK into history things that are not yet there. Thanks for connecting! Great to hear from you again!

[@rev.j.rogerallen9328]

@@RyanReevesM thanks for your response. You are right. I was projecting my own time onto the Anglicanism of the Reformation period. Thanks again for all your great lectures.

[@biblereadingoutreach2284]

(2 Corinthians 2:17) "For we are not as many, which corrupt the word of God: but as of sincerity, but as of God, in the sight of God speak we in Christ."

[@FMasamune]

I was just looking at your channel yesterday to see if I missed anything. Glad to see you back. Also, congrats on the book! I'm going to buy my copy now ;)

[@sageseraph5035]

Finally! After all these years!

[@RyanReevesM]

Sage Seraph 315 Only one! But I was writing two books and tired...:)

[@sageseraph5035]

Ryan Reeves Haha. Good for you dude. Awesome content as always.

[@harry9392]

King James was not Anglican . He was born a Roman Catholic, but brought up a Presbyterian. When he had the Bible was to be for all men so they all could read it. It was his Idea to have it translated. Was originally going to be a Presbyterian Bible

[@tombob671]

" if it was good enough for Peter, Paul and Moses, the KJ is good enough for me" 😜, actually I love it, but have no grinder do against the others

[@Baltic_Hammer6162]

I actually saw a serious claim like that except the KJV was the Apostle Paul's Bible. Some people's kids.

[@tombob671]

Baltic Hammer 😜

[@johnnyboone8484]

I would rather see people read some bible than no bible.

[@afcw1969]

Now that they are in Heaven they probably read the KJV more than the older texts because it is God's Ultimate translation to reach a damned world that is learning English in all nations under the one world global demonic order. Even Israelis speak English, such as Netanyahu. He really needs Jesus more than most because he is a damned murderer and liar.

[@Smartsoapsuds]

Tom Burgess the kjv was not good enough for them they used παράδοση meaning tradition they didn't rely on books. A complete bible is alexandrians codex and that would be the orthodox bible. It is illegal in greece to change subtract or add to the original documents as they were article 3 3

[@Ajp12333]

1 john 5:7 along with other passages that only appear once in the bible ARE quoted and referenced by the ante-nicene fathers which pre date manuscripts used by new translations. 1 john 5:7 Quoted by priscillikian (liber apologeticus) Referenced by Cyprian ( treatise 1, unity of church sec.6) Terrulian ( adversus praxes c.xxv) St. Jerome ( prologue to the canonical epistles) Also Priscillikian says its in johns writing not just repeating the phrase. If i am wrong please explain but this is important.

[@TaTa-ng1yu]

Always ask God for the truth... There are many men who disguised themselves as Christians but are not... The FALSE Church has many blind slaves who are willling to do everything to convince people that the false Church is indeed Christ's authorized church.

[@alejandrogonzales7022]

Yup. Its amazing how, for all of the times in the Bible that we are warned against false teachers, so many believers will just take what sounds good and run with it

[@jameswhyard2858]

There is as much evidence for Mohammad as Hsu ben bar Rabba...

[@jesussaves1875]

It's not so much the church denomination (I almost wrote demonination - quite apt actually) it is the Body of Christ (Those who have Christ as the Head of their gatherings and daily lives) that are the true "church".

[@jesussaves1875]

@@jameswhyard2858 what is that "Rabba" ~ no use talking "french" in amongst English speakers, you may as well be speaking Chinese

[@jameswhyard2858]

@@jesussaves1875 Rabbi, for if the (Greek) christ ever existed, then most probably may have been his (Hebrew) name. Consider the hidden meaning of Barabbas, to be released under a (never existed) custom...

[@OliverCovfefe]

RETURN OF A LEGEND

[@lrosario552]

Yay! My brain is very excited about this :)

[@kathywolf4558]

Makes me laugh to hear the Word of God has been and is copyrighted.

[@ChaplainBobWalkerBTh]

the King James is not copyrighted in the USA

[@maaifoediedelarey4335]

Yes, on the face of it, indeed ridiculous. Until one keeps in mind that at that time, there were so many conflicting ideas and Bible versions, that the copyright on the KJV (at the time) was meant to ensure the printing presses of that day could not alter any of the decided upon text of the Bible - it wasn't copyrighted then for reasons of profit (as is normally the case), but to keep the content there-of pure, even to the extent of only allowing one printing press (Barker family) to be allowed to print the Bible (later extended to Oxford and Cambridge Universities as well, in order to correct topographical errors). Hence it probably did serve a purpose from that time to the present. It may even still be necessary , in order to continue to keep it true - as we are truly swamped by a magnitude of false Bibles today, mostly contaminated by the Vatican ground texts.

[@ChaplainBobWalkerBTh]

@@maaifoediedelarey4335 Excellent reply - thank you the Cambridge edition (old one) is still faithful that I know of.

[@maaifoediedelarey4335]

@@ChaplainBobWalkerBTh Thank you, I will look into that version - it's becoming noticeably more difficult to obtain pure copies of the original editions, as each year passes. A sign of the times.

[@haku22222]

I had only been saved a year or two before I knew KJV was right bible. Other ones tracking their lineage of manuscript & Antioch vs Alexandrian manuscripts have fought forever it seems. But KJV being stopped & frozen so has made it stick out against bibles that are corrupted & NIV that legit publishes 'Joys Of Gay Sex' & 'The Satanistnic Bible.' That's also ontop of NIV being able to Change it around. Verse 22. Stop messing with the bible.

[@bama1usaf]

Jesus and the prophets spoke with an English accent everyone knows that.

[@JohnO318]

If the KJV was good enough for Paul, then it is good enough for me.

[@karens8722]

Trevor: The question is the accuracy in the translation from the Hebrew and Greek. Not the accent of the translators. Your comment is stupid. I suppose the bible shouldn't be translated into polish because the translators have a polish accent? Do you have a brain?

[@paulrobinson9318]

And Greek and Aramaic, the language of the New Testament. " John O'Donnell Yeah, but I doubt it if there wasn't a time gap of about 1600 years between "Paul" and "King James of Scotland/England/", and a distance of about 1, 800 miles! "Paul" read "Hebrew bible"/ tenak, didn't he? "

[@paulrobinson9318]

+Karen S "Trevor: The question is the accuracy in the translation from the Hebrew and Greek. Not the accent of the translators. Your comment is stupid. I suppose the bible shouldn't be translated into polish because the translators have a polish accent? Do you have a brain? " Do you not understand sarcasm? The point is that the KJ, and the various accents are NOT accurate reflections of the Bibes the New Testament church used. Many of the modern translations are. Paul never spoke English, OR Polish

[@gregb6469]

Some people are too constipated to have a sense of humor.

[@dannycaudle7850]

Myth doesn’t mean a lie. The opposite of myth isn’t reality.

[@fredworthmn]

I agree. The true meaning of myth is a story which illustrates a point. The story can be based on facts or created as a story. Whether the story is true or not is irrelevant to the point.

[@dannycaudle7850]

fredworthmn my brother. I agree

[@patsucher7781]

The opposite of a lie may not be the truth... Unlike a lie, a myth may prove to be true.

[@Brandplucked]

The guy who made this video was doing pretty well until the last part where he went off the rails. John Wesley's 1755 translation of the N.T. was NOT "a revision (or a tweaking) of the KJB to put it in the language of today." It was a whole new translation (and not a very good one) that in many places was based on a different Greek text than the KJB. And it still had all those "thee"s and "thou"s and "ye"s in it (which is a good things) but was hardly in the language of the day in 1755.

[@Luke-qs1lv]

Will Kinney I thought I might find you here😉😀 I mean that respectfully, not mockingly

[@paulrobinson9318]

Mockingly is OK as well. Kinney is a KJO cultist.

[@Luke-qs1lv]

Paul Robinson So am I if you want to call me that

[@Luke-qs1lv]

Paul Robinson So am I if you want to call me that

[@paulrobinson9318]

I apopreciate your honesty. Many refuse to admit it!

[@kjvnews8326]

The Lord gave the word: great was the company of those that published it. (Psalm 68:11 KJB)

[@bobbyray6502]

Amen ❤

[@jeremiahtassinari1743]

"For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life." John 3:16 Only Jesus is the way to Heaven and be saved from hell. "But God commendeth his love toward us, in that, while we were yet sinners, Christ died for us." Romans 5:8 "Jesus saith unto him, I am the way, the truth, and the life: no man cometh unto the Father, but by me." John 14:6 Have you confessed Jesus as your LORD and Savior? You must confess Him as your LORD and believe in your heart that God raised Him from the dead to be saved from eternal damnation in hell and be able to go to Heaven "That if thou shalt confess with thy mouth the Lord Jesus, and shalt believe in thine heart that God hath raised him from the dead, thou shalt be saved." Romans 10:9 "For there are three that bear record in heaven, the Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost: and these three are one." 1 John 5:7

[@marcusgriffith6529]

Jeremiah Tassinari if anyone misses these scriptures they have totally missed the point of the Word of God. God bless you!

[@petewalsh764]

There is no hell, Hell is a miss translation.

[@jeremiahtassinari1743]

pete walsh How so? Do you know if you will go to heaven when you die?

[@paulrobinson9318]

pete walsh Funny - Jesus thought there was. Guess He was mistaken . ..

[@petewalsh764]

Jeremiah, How so? Er look it up. There never was a word called hell, it was sheol (Hebrew, means She'ol (/ˈʃiːoʊl/ SHEE-ohl, /-əl/; Hebrew שְׁאוֹל‬ ʃeʾôl), in the Hebrew Bible, is a place of darkness to which all the dead go, both the righteous and the unrighteous, regardless of the moral choices made in life, a place of stillness and darkness cut off from life and from God.[1]) hades (Greek, In older Greek myths, the realm of Hades is the misty and gloomy[78] abode of the dead (also called Erebus[78]) where all mortals go when they die. Very few mortals could leave Hades once they entered. The exceptions, Heracles and Theseus, are heroic.[citation needed] Even Odysseus in his Nekyia (Odyssey, xi) calls up the spirits of the departed, rather than descend to them. Later Greek philosophy introduced the idea that all mortals are judged after death and are either rewarded or cursed.[citation needed]

[@nunyabiznez6381]

I am descended from Puritans and Separatists who came to New England nearly 4 centuries ago. As far as I know, they all used the Geneva Bible. I have the one that one of my ancestors brought with him to what became the Massachusetts Bay colony in 1632. The bible was printed in 1560 and has my ancestor's genealogical information inscribed between the old and new Testaments. The Puritans and Separatists did not come to America in search of religious freedom. My Separatist ancestors came to Plymouth in 1620 to found a communist theocracy. Eventually they abandoned the communist economy and converted to pure capitalism. But they retained the theocracy for decades. It was, for example, a capital offense to belong to any number of other faiths including Society of Friends as well as Baptists which was by and large why William Blackstone moved away from Boston and founded his own little enclave in what eventually became Cumberland Rhode Island. I learned a lot about him when I lived on his former estate. Rhode Island might have been the only colony actually founded in part on religious freedom as hat was where people fled to, in order to escape the Puritanism of the Massachusetts Bay Colony. Boston and the other communities to the north were likewise founded as theocracies by some of my other ancestors and were to start with more capitalist in structure though they did out of necessity pool their resources early on. The point being that they were theocracies not places of religious refuge. Connecticut likewise. Even Pennsylvania began as a Quaker theocracy that soon permitted other faiths but that was after Rhode Island. As far as I always knew and this was taught to me by my father who held up our 1560 Geneva Bible side by side with our 1647 copy of the KJV, the reason for the new edition was to correct translation mistakes. I never heard of King James attempting to take away the bible from the people of New England. We were neither taught that in public school nor Sunday school nor through oral tradition. All we were ever taught was that the KJV was simply a revised translation using better sources. Of course we had easy access since my father would sit us down and have us read section by section with the two side by side comparing them. But growing up we used neither but rather more modern translations.

[@Lightside888]

THUS SAITH THE LORD: in the beginning was the WORD; and the WORD was with GOD, and the WORD was GOD. And the WORD became flesh, and dwelt among us. The Word of GOD is quick and powerful, sharper than any two edged sword, piercing even to the dividing assunder of soul, and spirit, and of joints, and marrow, and is a discerner of the thoughts, and intents of the heart. Hebrews 4:12 KJV 📃/ my GOD is a perfect GOD! and he left us his perfect Word preserved for all Generations! The Words of the LORD, are pure words, as silver tried in the furnace of the earth, purified seven times. Pslam 12:6 KJV 📃/ the Heavens, and the earth shall pass away, but my words shall never pass away Luke 24:33 KJV 📃/ the words of the LORD are established in heaven forever. King James did not write the words of the LORD. The prophecy came not by the will of men in times past. But Holy men of GOD spake, as they were moved by the HOLY GHOST. The original 1611 authorized king James Bible is the infallible, inspired Word of GOD. THUS SAITH THE LORD: where there is the Word of a King, there is power. Ecc 8:4 KJV 📃/ All modern Bible perversions are created by the Vatican Jesuits, from the Egyptian, alexandrian line of text. And those Bible's remove entire verses, take away the blood of JESUS, and use semantics to twist the scriptures. They take away the Glory, deity, and power of GOD'S Word. And there's nothing new under the sun. Remember what happened in the garden of Eden, when Eve told Satan what GOD said in his Words to her, and Satan replied (Yay hath GOD said? And the serpent was more subtle than any other beast of the field. So nothing has changed since the garden, and loserfer 😈 is still deceiving people, and he uses men to change the truth of GOD into a Lie. Because he was a murderer from the beginning, and abode not in the truth, when he speaketh, he speaketh a lie, because he is the Father of Lies! So let GOD be true; And every man a Liar. Romans 3:4 KJV 📃 May GOD bless you all, and lead you into the knowledge of the truth. Sanctify them with thy Truth; Thy Word is truth. John 17:17 KJV 📃

[@rebellupus6484]

So basically for everyone to get to heaven they have to learn English. Because if they don't how will they read the true king James version? No, you wanna know what the most accurate bible is, a bible in Hebrew, you know the original language the jews spoke, and the what they would read in. That way every single word and phrase is accurate.

[@joeltunnah]

Stella Lupus, nobody said people who don’t know English won’t be saved. Where are you getting that nonsense? The KJV is God’s preserved Words *in English*. If you speak Spanish, obviously you’d read a Spanish bible. And only the OT was written in Hebrew, and what we have today is the corrupt “Masoretic Text”, which removed several prophecies of Jesus, and a verse of the acrostic Psalm 145. Luckily those missing and corrupted verses were translated into Greek in 200BC, so we have them accurately restored in the KJV because the translators consulted the Septuagint.

[@Lightside888]

@@joeltunnah Amen brother, I decided not to respond to that person's comments, its only going to cause strife, and vain babblings, that will lead unto more ungodliness, so thanks for responding in defense of my comment, but ultimately we are defending the infallible KJV word of GOD. I marvel at how many so called Christians are either ignorant, or deceived, that they would attack the word of GOD. I guess they don't think our perfect GOD, could leave his perfect word, in every language, for all Generations. Most people just ignore the commandment of GOD, study to show thyself approved unto GOD, a Workman who needeth not to be ashamed but Rightly dividing the word of truth. 2 Timothy 2:15 KJV 📃 I'm only a babe in CHRIST, I was saved just under 3 years ago, but took plenty of time to study the modern Bible perversions, and compared it to the King James Bible. And if your being taught, and led by the HOLY GHOST, its obvious that the modern Vatican Jesuit Bible's are just satanic counterfeits of the true inspired KJV word of GOD. I don't like GMO'S, and fake food, so why would I read Fake news. I'll stick the organic word of truth. Man cannot live on bread alone, but by every word that proceedeth from the mouth of GOD. Matt 4:4 KJV 📃 Sanctify them with thy Truth, thy word is truth. John 17:17 KJV 📃 May GOD bless you abundantly brother.

[@joeltunnah]

LIGHTSIDE KJV, amen!

[@paulrobinson9318]

Maybe you can explain what the point is of your post? Since every translation - GOOD or BAD - contains those same words, I am confused at your use of them. AND you conflate the written Word with the Logos of God - a serious error in scriptural logic, for they are only remotely connected. Your irrational attenmpt to use those verses to support the KJB is a failed attempt at cultism - for not one of those verses supports the KJ as anything but another (poor) translation of limited texts. "my GOD is a perfect GOD! and he left us his perfect Word preserved for all Generations! The Words of the LORD, are pure words, as silver tried in the furnace of the earth, purified seven times. Pslam 12:6 KJV" NO, he didn't, and that verse doesn't say that. ALL Bibles have those same verses - it has NOTHING to do with the KJ - and in any event you are taking it put of its context and forcing it into another that contradicts it. God is perfect - NO translation on earth is. Never has been. Cannot be! What God preserved for genertions is the poor and downtrodden - simple Bible study would show that Hebrew destroys your argumemt and makes your statement pointless. What God preserved for generations is the poor and downtrodden - simple Bible study would show that. You have done what cults do - deliberatly misquoted scriptuire to supprt a false teaching. Correctly translated: " 12:5 “Because of the violence done to the oppressed, 15 because of the painful cries 16 of the needy, I will spring into action,” 17 says the Lord. “I will provide the safety they so desperately desire.” 18 12:6 The Lord’s words are absolutely reliable. 19 They are as untainted as silver purified in a furnace on the ground, where it is thoroughly refined. 20 12:7 You, Lord, will protect them; 21 you will continually shelter each one from these evil people, 22 " "21 tn The third person plural pronominal suffix on the verb is masculine, referring back to the “oppressed” and “needy” in v. 5 (both of those nouns are plural in form), suggesting that the verb means “protect” here. The suffix does not refer to אִמֲרוֹת (’imarot, “words”) in v. 6, because that term is feminine gender. 22 tn Heb “you will protect him from this generation permanently.” The third masculine singular suffix on the verb “protect” is probably used in a distributive sense, referring to each one within the group mentioned previously (the oppressed/needy, referred to as “them” in the preceding line). On this grammatical point see GKC 396 §123.f (where the present text is not cited). (Some Hebrew mss and ancient textual witnesses read “us,” both here and in the preceding line.) The noun דוֹר (dor, “generation”) refers here to the psalmist’s contemporaries, who were characterized by deceit and arrogance (see vv. 1-2). See BDB 189-90 s.v. for other examples where “generation” refers to a class of people."

[@ronvalentine6684]

One more myth! King James is actually Black.

[@martinagoldston8239]

That part

[@martinagoldston8239]

He shows nothing but white people in this video

[@UICeinnselaig]

Haha King James was irrefutably white from the house of stuart and the son of Mary Queen of Scots And Henry Stuart. His wholeole lineage Is known he is descended from Henry the VII. This is British history not ancient history. You should be ashamed that you're a sheep that has fell for an internet hoax based of one image that is uncredited and has no provenance. Stop embarrassing yourself

[@josephr.gainey2079]

What about the Oxford and Cambridge revisions of the 1760s? Thousands of changes were made at the time. It is an amalgam of these two efforts that is currently printed and available in stores. See A Textual History of the King James Bible by David Norton (Cambridge University Press, 2005) The version of history you delivered in your most informative and useful video doesn't account for these facts at all.

[@roberttassone7676]

Most of those changes were spelling , grammar, notes and typographical errors. Very little in way of translation was changed. I am very blessed to own a very rare 1762 Folio of Dr. Francis Sawyer Parris' standardized version that is the foundational link from antiquity to modernity

[@josephr.gainey2079]

@@roberttassone7676 Unfortunately, this is only a portion of the story for this edition was very quickly superceded by the 1769 edition revised by Benjamin Blayney. He made over 20,000 changes and David Norton's NEW CAMBRIDGE PARAGRAPH BIBLE (which is about as close to the true text of the 1611 as scholarship can produce) and his companion volume on the textual history document that many of these changes were actual changes of words and not just corrections of spellings and typographical errors. Despite what the KJV only supporters state, there is no one, perfect King James Version. Even the currently available versions of the KJV in stores today are not in complete agreement as to the text. The closest one comes are the Oxford and Cambridge University Presses editions. (They are also the closest to Blayney's 1769 text except for four minor changes, the last made in the late 1800s, if I remember correctly.) Even they disagree on several words--spelling only--and the punctuation of one or two verses which slightly changes the meaning but doesn't impact any doctrines. There are more differences between these versions and those published in the United States, where the text produced by different publishers (Thomas Nelson, Zondervan, Crossways, Hendrickson, etc.) aren't in 100% agreement as to the text.

[@timkhan3238]

The KJV is the perfect word of God. The modern bibles are the word of men, very opinionated bibles you can chose for favored theological advancement.

[@michaelcontreras148]

Tim Khan... No! The Catholic Bible is the word of God

[@anonymousperson6462]

"Historians know that the Matthew bible is the real primary version of our English bible. Every edition that followed, from Taverner and Becke, through the Great and Geneva bibles, and on to the king James and Revised versions, were further revisions of it"*. From "the story of the Matthew bible" in the preface "RMD unto the reader".

[@anonymousperson6462]

@@michaelcontreras148 and the kjv is a bit more catholic than one might think. It used a lot of the Latin, and the douay rheims can be found to come pretty close to how the kjv reads. Just a few verses will be significantly different there.

[@chairde]

The Catholic bible is the pure word of God. The King James Bible is a political manifesto from the British.

[@DurandCompton]

Where in the Bible does it say that?

[@mrmanlet7385]

Your guys’ logic is absurd. If I don’t read the KJV I’m going to hell? So people before 1611 couldn’t have possibly been saved? What if people don’t speak English? I am a proud reader of the ESV Bible. Guess what, it still conveys the SAME MESSAGE as the KJV

[@Baltic_Hammer6162]

Use BibleGateway.com and its Parallel feature to view up to 5 versions at a time. You'll see most of the time passages are the same or very close. Once in a great while I've run into greatly different translations of a passage. Trying to recall the most recent I was looking at 15 different versions of a passage. For comparing single passages by the ton use www.biblestudytools.com/ and its Compare feature.

[@JOHNch4.v.v.7to10]

Psalm 55:18 (KJV says "with", New World versions say "against". Yeah, that's the exact OPPOSITE.); 1 John 5:7 (KJV: The Trinity ; New World Versions: NOT the Trinity.). You're so blind.

[@Baltic_Hammer6162]

The Orthodox Jewish Bible says against as do most translations. So the problem is in the KJV. In the 1John the Greek just says there's 3 witnesses, like the majority of translations. Another example of KJV adding extra stuff.

[@mrmanlet7385]

Timothy Yakich I compared this passage to the ESV and it says the exact same thing. You KJV onlyists crack me up

[@JOHNch4.v.v.7to10]

MrManlet, you are outright lying, sir. Here's Psalm 55:18 (KJV): "He HATH DELIVERED my soul in PEACE from the battle THAT WAS AGAINST ME : for there WERE many WITH me."/////Psalm 55:18 (ESV) : He REDEEMS my soul in SAFETY from the battle THAT I WAGE, For many ARE arrayed AGAINST me./////There is NOTHING even closely related in these two texts!! Plus, the KJV is past tense, the ESV is present tense. ////MrManlet ("let man"?), either you are completely blinded by man's doctrines or you are of your father, Satan, the father of lies! Your god IS the author of confusion.

[@Pfsif]

I threw out all my KJV Bibles.

[@afcw1969]

The truth is hard to swallow.

[@richardsellsaz6865]

The KJV is just another translation and the KJV you find in the USA is the altered 1789 version,not the original 1611 version.The Catholic Church's Douay Rheims was the original English translation and influenced the later KJV.Some people obsessing over the KJV that was written for the Church of England and not some fundamentalist weirdos is bizarre

[@shawnglass108]

One of the funniest and most ridiculous claims I hear the KJV onlyists make is that “the KJV reads at a 5th grade level “. They don’t understand that the Flesch-Kincaid reading test they used to compare it to other translations doesn’t actually read what it’s testing!..It only counts the words and syllables per sentence. You could literally put complete gibberish into it (and they have) or foreign languages (and they have) and as long as it has less words per sentence and less syllables (average) it will come out to a lower reading level. No! The KJV isn’t at a 5th grade reading level and almost no 5th grader could understand most of it..Research what I just told you for yourself. So that you can call them out on this nonsense when they repeat it. In their defense, Most of them have absolutely no idea about the actual “reading test” they used (Flesch-Kincaid). They just repeat whatever another KJV Onlyist has told them.

[@shawnglass108]

Just FYI..The Flesch-Kincaid test actually does a great job of predicting the readability of texts in similar styles of writing. When they’re from the same period and in the same language.

[@GoldenWingsLittleBirds]

0:00 在我開始之前想指出 0:01 我出版的一本新書是 0:03 現在出來了 0:04 如果有的話，請查看下面的附屬鏈接 0:06 你想了解更多重要時刻 0:09 歷史往往是神話的尼龍搭扣 0:11 關於他們的創作，無論是喬治 0:14 華盛頓在蘋果樹朱利葉斯 0:16 凱撒是剖腹產出生的 0:18 這就是哥倫布這個名字的由來 0:21 發現了美洲而不是加勒比海 0:23 這些神話往往會增長，而同時 0:27 有些神話比其他神話更糟糕 0:29 發明是為了使事物大於 0:31 它們是或被創造出來的 0:34 歷史上的許多神話都是捏造的 0:36 錯誤記憶事實的結果或 0:40 錯誤判斷先前的上下文 0:42 現在我們要花一段時間 0:44 看看關於這個的三個神話 0:46 欽定版聖經現在我們不打算 0:49 今天涉及很多索賠 0:52 僅由英皇欽定本 (KJV) 提供 0:55 到那個運動，而是我們要 0:57 看看更廣泛的神話 0:59 流行教科書中經常講述或 1:02 只是時不時地就像故事一樣 1:05 歷史講述者實際上誤判了 1:08 上下文或一些事實 1:10 因為它們已經發生所以我們不想說 1:13 這些神話是有害的謊言或 1:15 類似的事情，而是他們 1:17 誤判故事他們推翻了事情 1:20 他們阻止我們注意到一些 1:23 關於起源的細微差別和陰影 1:25 英皇欽定本 1:26 第一個神話是詹姆斯國王是如此 誤區一 詹姆斯國王想要壓制清教主義 1:30 反對清教主義，他希望 1:32 聖經為了讓他們閉嘴這個神話 1:36 更多的是我們大眾的問題 1:37 我發現的故事的娛樂 1:40 KJV 這通常發生在 1:43 感恩節的時候，比如 1:45 學校期間舉行戲劇表演和遊行 1:47 感恩節是我們的時節 1:50 通常聽說宗教是怎樣的 1:52 在舊世界被禁止 1:54 這些擠在一起渴望呼吸的人群 1:56 免費，所以他們整理了一些 1:59 搖搖欲墜的籌碼並駛過 2:01 大西洋有時確實可以聽起來 2:03 就像聖經本身被剝奪一樣 2:05 事實上我的信徒之手 2:07 記得我的孩子參加過 2:10 他學前班的日子實際上是國王 2:13 詹姆斯四處走動 2:14 每個人都在頭腦中並採取他們的 2:16 聖經 我聽過流行的說法 2:18 雖然那應該更清楚 2:20 電視裡有幾十人被處決 2:22 在伊麗莎白的領導下，首先是為了簡單 2:24 作為伊麗莎白時代清教徒的事實 2:27 詹姆士一世時期的英格蘭開始聽起來有點 2:29 當然，我們有點像斯大林主義的俄羅斯 2:32 不要輕視迫害或 2:33 即使是壓迫，但情況 2:36 英格蘭更注重結束異議 2:38 而不是直接的迫害 2:40 伊麗莎白統治時期和統治時期 2:42 詹姆斯一世英國聖公會你 2:45 必須清楚地了解 2:47 每個人都知道這是新教徒 2:48 新教徒後來宣稱盎格魯人 2:51 天主教或某種複古 2:54 如果無像論避免了新教 2:56 是一項現代發明，問題在於 3:00 伊麗莎白和詹姆斯的時代雖然是 3:02 這部動畫以崇拜為中心，而不是 3:04 很少有人知道我總是迴避的一個事實 3:07 人們為了告訴他們什麼 3:09 然而你正在處理的是兩個 3:11 新教的版本是在 3:14 1560 年代伊麗莎白統治時期 3:17 雙方就法衣爭論不休 3:19 實際上引用了相同的來源反對 3:22 彼此好你還沒有讀過所以 3:25 所以如果你這樣做了你就會知道 3:27 這些法衣錯了，你 3:28 沒有讀過某某，他們說 3:30 他們並沒有錯，他們是 3:31 良心問題所以到底怎樣 3:34 正在英國聖公會教堂發生 3:36 本身這些年確實比較多 3:39 兄弟姐妹之間的爭論 3:41 並不使它變得無關緊要，它只是意味著 3:42 我們正在處理的不是 3:44 有反對派的占主導地位的教會 3:47 其核心是神學或信仰告白 3:49 相反，我們正在尋找不同的 3:51 應用程序和那些可以是非常 3:52 重要的事情，但它們並不能讓你 3:55 彼此完全分開 3:59 重要的是最終的朝聖者 4:00 進入這個新世界的是 4:02 他們沒有逃離詹姆斯，而是被派來的 4:05 他們被特許他們被允許 4:07 詹姆斯以多種方式開始 4:10 允許異議者離開是善意的 4:12 將兩個 Squa 模糊分開 4:15 到大西洋的另一邊 4:16 當你在那裡時，只要你發送 4:18 好好交易回來，然後你就會被允許 4:20 比你崇拜的任何教堂都更敬拜 4:21 碰巧在這裡建造了它 4:23 英國國教所以當詹姆斯坐著時 4:26 在漢普頓宮會議上

[@flippintobyland7257]

This is just nuts you put out this kind of content free , I feel like I owe you thousands in admissions fees . Thanks a lot, really interesting .

[@arthaschen4701]

FlippinTobyland then pay your ticket thru patronage

[@sureshabreu3171]

I agree, I have learned much more from the judicious use of your Spirit led gifting than l could have in a lifetime. Lord Bless.

[@ZRWF]

Guys c'mon look up the inquisition and King James involvement with the Catholic church.

[@Joe-pb3bm]

Like how some people have trouble understanding Shakespeare's English. I bought my Brother an NIV Bible (colloquial).

[@alg11297]

This was supposed to be a literate and accurate translation of the Bible from all sources. How many geniuses on the committee could read or speak Hebrew?

[@sothca20001]

Quite a few!

[@Sunrayman123]

Someone said, " I know a little Greek and I know a little Hebrew. The Greek owns a restaurant and the Hebrew is a butcher!"

[@davidllewis4075]

When my brother was a student-preacher in small church back in early 1960s he used the ASV. The elders made him go back to KJV, "just the way Paul wrote it".

[@tylerwhaley4872]

yes, because paul spoke 17th century english xd

[@breannawilliamson9787]

🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣

[@kenavery8144]

I'm sure the 65,000 difference in the underlying text had nothing to do with it.

[@davidllewis4075]

@@kenavery8144 Not quite sure what you are saying; but am reasonably sure the elder in question would not know there was an underlying text. Such is the life of a student pastor in a small town. David

[@kenavery8144]

@@davidllewis4075 This is an assumption on my part, that the Elder had knowledge of the superior biblical accuracy of the Syrian text over the Egyptian text.

[@Steblu74]

Bible translations are important, but there is a greater factor: “As a shepherd seeketh out his flock in the day that he is among his sheep that are scattered; so will I seek out my sheep, and will deliver them out of all places where they have been scattered in the cloudy and dark day” (Ezekiel 34:12). Those given to the Son before the foundation of the world will come to Him and be preserved to the last day. It’s not so much what WE know, or are able to ascertain by labor or study (and I’m not impugning study), but it’s about WHO knows US. If we exhaust all the knowledge of all the great and godly men who ever lived, at the end of our lives the final plaintive wail of the good thief, “remember me!” and Christ’s glorious reply is all that matters. Godspeed!

[@mrniceguy3750]

@@wdcurry111 Indeed…. Those that are given to the Son before the foundation of the world isn’t a predestination of individuals. It’s a confirmation to those that are biblically reborn that they will be saved.

[@mrniceguy3750]

@@wdcurry111 The Bible teaches that the Church will go through tribulations….

[@mrniceguy3750]

@@wdcurry111 Just another false religion…

[@mrniceguy3750]

@@wdcurry111 Nope.. The word of God is the only authority..

[@margaretwheatley6446]

Absolutely 💯

[@Skarbrand_the_exiled]

so happy you are back, you really got me into church history.

[@All-shall-say-Jesus-is-Lord]

Me too

[@richardwebb2348]

josh w - otherwise known as Iron Age biblical myth.

[@bluwng]

Simple minds.

[@MegaGeorge1948]

It's George Washington and the CHERRY tree, not the apple tree. LOL.

[@nasticanasta]

i saw that too

[@jaymcdude1291]

Mandela effect?

[@codypendant1]

Ask Johnny Cherrytree

[@JLFAN2009]

Not only that but also, according to Parson Weems' hagiography, the boy George Washington didn't actually CHOP down the said cherry tree: rather, he simply barked it.

[@ontologicallysteve7765]

@@codypendant1 Either him, or Johnny Grape-Pit. Both reliable sources.

[@juanfranciscoaleman6938]

You are back finally! Really enjoy your lectures man, keep it up!

[@benedictalmarines721]

He hasn’t posted a new video in a long time. What do you think happened to him?

[@ManuelPinner]

I Read the Authorize King James Bible Only! Because it's from the Textus Receptus New Testament and the Levitical Hebrew Text Old Testament which is Real Scriptures!

[@Policesamuri77717]

I pray and meditate several times a day, filling my mind with the beauty of Gods wonderful words. I rehearse soul winning verses which I use when the opportunity presents itself to share the Gospel. I am so thankful to God for the comfort of his beautiful words. Praise His Holy Name.

[@qaz-fi1id]

Such a odd comment.

[@extinguishedajunkprofessor1133]

I am sorry you wasted your time, How many have you sucked in so far? I will help them escape.

[@Policesamuri77717]

Extinguished a Junk Professor Hello sir. What you suggest is impossible. When a person has become a true BORN AGAIN BELIEVER, a spiritual transaction occurs that can never be stopped. God indwells the person with his Holy Spirit (Romans 8:16). This last for all eternity.

[@extinguishedajunkprofessor1133]

@@Policesamuri77717 I know you believe this nonsense and you will use excruciating verbal gymnastics to explain the journey of those who escape the grip of superstition. You are fortunate to have the power of discernment to determine that the true believers who no longer believe, were not genuine believers in the first place. I also have the magic power to determine that those apologists who say they were atheists were not true atheists in the first place and are deceivers.

[@Policesamuri77717]

Extinguished a Junk Professor 😊 You definitely put a smile on my face. It is always nice to read a comment from someone interesting. It is late and I am up early for work tomorrow. I will pray that God gives me a proper response. 🙏🕵️👍

[@Eastmarch2]

It’s almost like we could discuss these matters reasonably... oh wait! We can!

[@ThatBoomerDude56]

Discuss matters reasonably? What? No. That's so 20th century.

[@skylarkprowrestler]

Who created the portraits of King James of Scotland as a shemite?

[@zivkovicable]

He commissioned and approved the portraits...He was Gay, you knew that right?

[@ronaldcatapang5739]

Does anyone know that King James was black?

[@ronaldcatapang5739]

@רחבעם the first king of England was black, king James was black. Why not research it,see it for yourself.

[@paulmcwhorter]

Great Video. I sure enjoyed your Church History series. I have watched that several times.

[@michelduncan8875]

FOR THOSE WHO BELIEVE..... NO PROOF IS NECESSARY..... FOR THOSE WHO DON'T BELIEVE... NO PROOF IS POSSIBLE......!!!!

[@colemarie9262]

Michel Duncan no, Christianity has been discussed and debated amongst Christians themselves for hundreds of years. Refusing a educated discussion or conversation is the adult equivalent of sticking your fingers in your ears. You look silly.

[@goodnight8169]

@@colemarie9262 what??? Are you even real??? Don't you see a lot of preachers who had discussion in the university and other public platforms ???

[@colemarie9262]

Eliyahu I honestly don't even understand your reply. Are you saying you never see preachers debating the gospel? Well yeah, a person preaching it already has their views relatively set.....though depending on the type of Christianity they may have four to thirteen YEARS of schooling relating to theology and ministry to even be ordained in the first place (the exception being Baptists, where a "preacher" can have anywhere from a masters to zero formal education-the individual church decides). Seems like ample time to me for discussion. And this is a video BY a christian talking about christian history- not one attacking the Bible. The poster I replied to didn't seem to watch the video at all and instead had a knee jerk reaction to the title. And yes, I still think that makes them look silly.

[@maaifoediedelarey4335]

@@goodnight8169 I think you need to study your Bible more closely ma'am ! Read 2 Timothy 4:2 'Preach the word; be instant in season, out of season; reprove, rebuke, exhort with all longsuffering and doctrine'. Bible believers, amongst themselves, are *_obliged_* to study doctrine, and reprove, even rebuke, those with wrong doctrine. That is how a saved Christian grows in his/her faith.

[@jrewcooper9925]

We call those people fools

[@markchapman1188]

You lost me at George Washington’s “apple tree” instead of a cherry tree.

[@richardwebb2348]

Mark Chapman - I agree, understanding that there is a difference between an apple tree and a cherry tree is very taxing on the brain, especially for a person gullible enough to believe Iron Age biblical myths.

[@trishmcl9055]

@Dawn Yearby It's a"fib" to show how HONEST he was. (But he really wasn't).

[@trishmcl9055]

@@richardwebb2348 He has a right to believe the Bible without being mocked for it! Everybody needs something to believe in!

[@trishmcl9055]

I don't think it really matters what kind of tree it was?

[@johnnysalter7072]

Are you so weak that you through out the entire teaching for 1 thing you disagree with? Not that I see that it makes any difference but CHerry Tress were not brought to the U.S. until 1906. They are native to Japan, the Japanese embassy told the U.S, they were going to plant 2,000 trees, in Washington..

[@nunyabiznez6381]

I also want to point out that the Puritans and Separatists were NOT the same group. The Separatists wanted to simply form their own little theocratic enclave and be more or less left alone by Great Britain. The Puritans were revolutionaries who wanted to change Britain and purify it. This is born out by Cromwell. Eventually the Separatists of Plymouth Colony were swallowed up by the bigger more powerful Massachusetts Bay Colony who were Puritans. Also Britain sent a lot of non Separatists to Plymouth and within 30 years the Separatists were in the minority despite the fact that the colonial leaders imposed strict religious policies such as mandatory church attendance and participation. Perhaps the most famous "Pilgrim" was John Alden and he wasn't even a Separatist at all but merely a young barrel maker employed by the captain as mandated by law but because he became friendly with Bradford he was permitted to remain in Plymouth. I would also like to point out that throughout New England there were numerous fishing villages and trading posts, particularly out on Cape Cod, the islands and up in Maine where religion was not always a significant part of life and in fact out in Provincetown on the Cape, there has always been a tradition of being socially rebellious. Fishermen, artists, poets and today the LGBTQ community have taken refuge there but that was the case in the 1630s when a few families fled Plymouth to live a far more liberal lifestyle. Technically all of the cape was part of Plymouth Colony until it was absorbed into the Massachusetts Bay Colony but in practice, due to it's remoteness it was mostly left alone to it's own devices. The various islands and Maine were likewise mostly left alone. If you wanted real religious freedom you moved to a more remote area away from the Puritanical theocratic dogma. Just like back in England, if you lived in a more remote and rural part of the country you could live a more liberal lifestyle. If you preferred city life and wanted religious freedom you moved to Holland, perhaps Amsterdam. Jamestown in Virginia was made up of 2nd, 3rd, 4th etc. sons of well to do families and their servants. Religion played a lesser role in their lives. They were more pragmatic though not suitable as colonists as most had never done any work in their lives and when the problems started in that colony most of the servants they brought with them rebelled leaving the poor spoiled brat sons of wealthy and noble families to learn some harsh lessons about survival. Many did not learn those lessons. So Virginia was ostensibly members of the Church of England though in practice they were most likely agnostic. Connecticut was founded by Puritans from the Boston area. New Hampshire, while technically ruled by the Puritans for much of it's early history was a de facto independent territory. Religiously it was very diverse with rural families ranging from Roman Catholic in the northern part of the province to Puritan in the Southern most reaches though no part of the province was completely devoted to any one denomination and in between were, at least at the beginning, populated by non Christian Indians. Religion in colonial America is a very complex topic which should exclude generalizations like referring to the "Pilgrims" as puritans.

[@marsbanditnyc9043]

I NEVER CLICKED ON A VIDEO SO FAST ! Welcome back, hope to see more videos !

[@everettbass8659]

It was a cherry tree,I'm 67 and that's the way I read it.

[@biblereadingoutreach2284]

Acts 10:34 ¶ Then Peter opened his mouth, and said, Of a truth I perceive that God is no respecter of persons:

[@martinmallasch2814]

Wow, so much wrong here, I don't know where to start, I'm surprised you didn't happen to mention the catholics giving Tyndales bones a trial, finding his bones guilty, then burning his bones,and throwing the ashes in the river swift, no mention of the catholics working on the douaday rhems version in France, at the same time, no mention of the gun powder plot, the fact that king james PAID the translation teams, on the final work, ( although most translators never got paid) and the original Bible had a letter in it written to James, dread sovereign if I remember correctly. Then, if that wasn't enough you didn't address font or spelling changes which although were "corrections " didn't affect any doctrine. Plus being burned at the stake by catholics, for the crime of translating the Bible in English, the fact that the king himself worked on translating a part for his own personal benefit. All future translations would be radically different that the king james, because the source text was different. Corrupt source text produces a corrupt Bible. All you have to do on the modern versions is compare to the king james, and you can see the doctrine changes.

[@ablueab]

So glad that you are back! Thanks for your hard work -it's a blessing to all of us interested in church history

[@codypendant1]

I've always been a fan of separation of C&S, so even if it were unofficially " authorized", I'd be good with that, too.. you are correct about revisions of KJV, hence certain evangelicals that now believe in a 7 Year Tribune.. The Left Behind series... Peace! c):~)

[@gg2fan]

As a non-religious person deeply interested in this from a strictly historical point of view, the rivalries and battles between denominations and even person to person always struck me as really odd. I understand that when you have an order to enforce so as not to have a million different violently opinionated heretics running around causing trouble, it's important to make sure everyone's on the same page. This is why I think the whole idea of the ruthlessly totalitarian medieval church is kind of a scarecrow; the alternative is quite probably widespread tribal sectarian war led by a bunch of backwoods preachers who all think they've got it figured out. However when it carries on to the modern day, all that stuff feels like it should be in the past. Like if an American still hated the British for the way they treated us as colonies, it's just a bizarre hill to pick a fight on. I certainly don't mean to sound condescending but it just seems like the sort of thing that should have been left behind by the march of history, and the fact that so many people still take it so personally always seemed kind of petty to me. Maybe it's just because my mom's family was Catholic and my dad's is Lutheran. Is this sort of conflict an over exaggerated hysteria in the modern day? I don't mean to get political but a lot of the time this sort of thing gets played up and blown out of proportion in society, for instance if you put too much stock in the narrative about race in America you'd think that white people and black people were brawling in the streets every time they saw each other. I truly don't mean to belittle race struggles at all, but I think you know what I mean, nobody ever wrote the headline "White person and Black person have normal interaction or "Protestant and Catholic become friends and hang out sometimes". As I haven't gone to church since I was a tiny child and have never really worn any team colors so to speak, I have no reference on how much modern sectarian conflict is a real thing and how much of it is outrage culture hyperbole.

[@Baltic_Hammer6162]

The most ruthlessly totalitarian medieval church was in Geneva under John Calvin. The Vatican wasn't far behind but in many ways not even close to Calvin for ruthlessness.

[@roboparks]

? Now we see your Bias. Citation? Proof? 1 > the medieval period was over. It was the period of the Renaissance.

[@gregb6469]

Monty Python and Black Adder are not reliable sources of historical information.

[@roboparks]

+Skylitze Religion was culture in those days it was also the Law of the land. Not Just in Catholic Europe either. You can find it in any Religion the same issue. Even Buddhism and Hinduism their various sects Use to fight all the time. Yes Even the philosophy of the Chinese were divided at times. .

Protestant nonsense propaganda and outright lies aren't historical fact.

[@earlycraven7364]

King James did not look like that

[@jonathandk5]

How do you know, did you know him personally

[@cree983]

School’s back in session, yes.

[@rosealexander9007]

I wonder if these King James only people stop to think about the fact that not everyone knows English. A person that speaks french only can't read a word of the king James Bible and understand it.

[@MiikWatson66]

Hmmmm... It would be like going back to medieval times and only hearing the word read in latin to me (and interpreted to me)....

[@rosealexander9007]

@@MiikWatson66 exactly

[@FirstLast-zk5ow]

They persecute the KJB just like they persecuted Jesus. Forgive them Father, they truly do not understand what they do.

[@trafficjon400]

King James was Black according to other youtube channels?

[@DAsiebert]

so glade your back my friend

[@EvangelistNickGarrett]

Welcome back professor - I quoted you twice in a new book right alongside "Roman lives" by Plutarch. Looking forward to more of your wonderful and insightful teaching

[@anthonyrobertson7062]

Problem is the English language is continuing to change, as it has since 1611. The kjv is getting harder and harder for English speakers to understand. Eventually it will be like trying to read the "Canterbury tales", and no person in the future will be able to understand it. Funny how so many do not see this huge glaring problem. Eventually the kjv will have to be abandoned. For one it uses verb conjugations and subject pronouns that have totally fallen out of use.

[@Baltic_Hammer6162]

Ye are not straitened in us, but ye are straitened in your own bowels.

[@richardsellsaz6865]

The KJV is simply one of many English translations and those who somehow think the KJV is the "only" Bible is thankfully decreasing.

[@roberttassone7676]

Case in point is Wycliffe's translation in middle English. It is almost unrecognizable as English

[@clockworkmultiverse92]

So, King James himself was against any “King James Version Only” movement? Wow!

[@dafflad1]

ClockworkMultiverse KJV only will never find providence with the Lord

[@warrenrhinerson6373]

Not only was king James against the use of only one version of the Bible the king James translators themselves were against it and even acknowledged in the introduction to the king James version that it would need to be updated as more reliable manuscripts came available and the English language evolved.

[@johndisalvo6283]

@@dafflad1 It already has it.

[@kjvitor]

Idk what make you come with that realization! His intention was to come with a more reliable bible than was available at that time. The methods of King James translation where a proper method. The problem of today's new translations is that is not the proper way to translate a text. They don't translate word for word as in KJV, they translate thought for thought, what make the translator decide what the text means instead of what the text really said! King James Only is a product of this incompetence to translate a text properly that the NVs come at each publication of a new so called bible. I have no problem with new translations as long they translate the words with the proper way to translate a text. I bet John Wesley's translation was a proper way to translate a text for the common language at the time, not authering the proper doctrines. In accordance to KJV. But in the case of this new corrupted translations you find so much errors and verses that is missing compared to KJV you can't consider you are holding a bible. So, there is nothing wrong with KJV onlyism as long the basis for KJV onlyism is right! That is defending the word of God as it says, not what I think God says. KJV = the right manuscripts + proper translation methods + comitment to the word of God NV = the wrong manuscripts + the wrong translation methods + comitment to the ever changed language

[@warrenrhinerson6373]

@@kjvitor We came to this realization from reading the introduction to the KJV itself. In it the translators admit the KJV is not the end all be all translation and would bee revision if more reliable manuscripts are found and the english language changed. According to the Bible itself, the translation method the KJV translators used is actually not the proper one. The only verse in the Bible that speaks to the issue of translation says the Bible should only be translated in a way that preserves the original meaning(AKA thought for thought). The problem with word for word translations is that is can be extremely difficult to translate without changing the original meaning. For example a common greeting in Chinese is the equaivent of "I'm glad your are here" in English but literally translates to "Have you eaten". In some areas the NIV is actually more accurate and literal then the KJV. The verses you claim are missing from the NIV, are actually not missing at all, they are in the footnotes as they are not in the most reliable manuscripts which date to just 40 years after the book of Revolution was completed as opposed to the KJV manuscript basis which came 1000 years later. The only real basis for KJV onlyism is the believe that the KJV is the correct one based on simple tradition of use, not reliability or readability. The KJV isn't using the "right" manuscripts. It was using the best they had at the time, and they were no older then the 11th century. We now have 26,000 manuscripts, many of which date all the way to the second century for th new testament and the third century BC for the old testament. The NIV is using far more accurate and reliable manuscripts much closer to the originals, in a way that God himself says to Translate the Bible in the book of Nehemiah. The english language is also always changing. Is much so that it has changed more in just 40 years than Greek has in 2000. Many words in the KJV have changed meaning or have fallen out of use. If you try to force people to use a Bible they cannot understand, what makes you any better then the people who try to force the Bible away from people?

[@poppyozark]

I love this channel. I hope you haven't stopped making videos. I just found you. Great stuff. Thanks

[@christophersnedeker]

While I typically prefer kjv to modern bibles, I'm afraid those who say it's the one true perfect inerrant word of God are wrong. The kjv new testament was translated from the greek textus receptus and the creator Beza of the textus receptus admitted to changing the Bible. He changed Revelation 16 5 and said that he did it to change it back to what he thought it originally said in his notes. You might say "Beza was inspired by the holy spirit to change it back to what it originally was" but the word of God cannot be inspired twice according to psalm 12 6 The words of the Lord are pure words: as silver tried in a furnace of earth, purified seven times. 7Thou shalt keep them, O Lord, thou shalt preserve them from this generation for ever. They can be lost and then found but they cannot be lost and inspired again.

[@TheBLACKboard65]

Wonderful presentation! I just heard someone try to disprove the validity of the Bible by saying it has a copyright. Now, I know why. Thank you!

[@markkenney5802]

Dude! It's so good to have something new from you! I've literally watched all of your previous videos at least twice. Please keep them coming!

[@richardwebb2348]

Mark K - what is the purpose of 'literally' in your sentence?

[@francenepernell707]

Was King James Black man?

[@jonathanshapiro3361]

The King James Bible is the perfect inerrant word of God. Matthew 24:35 “Heaven and earth shall pass away, but my words shall not pass away.” King James Version (KJV)

[@HendrikdeBeer]

Wow. Thank you. There's so many people that try to disprove every form of KJV advocacy. I really appreciate your moderate stick-to-the-facts approach. It actually allows for some of us, who love and keep the KJV as faithful translations, to be welcomed in the family of sober thinking Christianity.

[@ΑΡΗΣΚΟΡΝΑΡΑΚΗΣ]

KJV Bible isn't a faithful translation. If you really want to study the Bible, lift your arse and go to learn the language of the prototypes.

[@HendrikdeBeer]

@@ΑΡΗΣΚΟΡΝΑΡΑΚΗΣ Brother, I love you, and bless you in the name of the Lord. I am sorry if what I said offended you.

[@warrenrhinerson6373]

@@ΑΡΗΣΚΟΡΝΑΡΑΚΗΣ actually the King James Version is a faithful translation, and they were using the best manuscripts they had at the time. However, there is no such thing as a perfect translation

[@creativewriter3887]

The King James bible was more sacred propaganda than it was a "translation". It could not be a translation. It was a translation of a translation of a translation. No one spoke Greek and certainly NO ONE spoke Hebrew. No Jewish scholars were consulted becasue the Jews were exiled from England in the 1300s and only returned in late 1600s LONG AFTER the KJV was created. And it shows. There are SERIOUS errors between the KJV and the Hebrew scriptures. But it's not just indicative of the KJV.. it's inidicative of Church texts. The KJV just kept the POLEMIC renderings the Church Texts (and subsequent bibles) intact in its own "translation". All it did was to sort of Textually unite Protestant Post-Elizabethan England by gettng them to use a standard bible. But this elevation to "inerrant" and "infallible" status is laughable if it weren't so tragic.

[@creativewriter3887]

@@warrenrhinerson6373 It's a translation of a translation of a translation. All they did was merge the two bibles currently in use into ONE "Text only" unit. Which is now the fourth generation translation. And then the KJV changed three more times since then. Rabbi Tovia Singer did a whole lecture on the book of Daniel -- and how the KJV rendered it and found during his research that in the mid 1800s there was a serious change to one of the chapters when comparisons were made between the orignal 1611 copy of the KJV and sometime in the late late 1700s/early 1800s when they reissued the KJV. Then in 1911 or sometime around there, they brought out the orignal plates of the KJV and reprinted the original version. Of course, neither comports to the original Hebrew/Aramaic Text, but then there's that.

[@moegillums9301]

Hello, waiting for him to say king James is a Israilites brother,but that will never come out at the beginning of the story or end, show who the devil's are....

[@a.d.9889]

Gen 22:18, Matt 25:32, Acts 17:26, Rev. 7:9 Don't be misled. I pray you find the Truth

[@davidryle]

Welcome back. I've viewed a few KJV video ramblings. This is a more concise distillation for those of us of the lay. Thanks!

[@sovereigngracedoctrine5774]

Again you lie. you say that the new bibles are almost the same as the King James Bible, that there are very few differences, when in fact there are over 8,000 differences in the New Testament and over 10,000 in the Old Testament.

[@Hugo_jordao_oficial]

I’m so happy you’re back I’m an Angolan Christian and you have no idea how much your lecture impacted my life. I hope you get to see this comment massive thanks. Are your books available on Amazon ?

[@robertlee9712]

No Such Thing As Christines In The KJV They Killed My Lord Yahweh APTTMH

[@batboylives]

I also encourage you to give a fella named Finis Dake a listen. And if you for any one you would like me to hear, let me know.

[@kimberleerivera7062]

Glory To GOD!! Thank you Ryan Reeves for all your hard work - your book which I look forward to reading and for sharing this with us!

[@jefferyschirm4103]

I always heard King James had it printed so the average person could have and hold their own bible . It angered him that only the priest and bishops could read it ! It was an insult to the king's intelligents .

[@m-bronte]

I think this is a bias review based on his own understanding. Not once did he mention the "Septuagint"!

[@douglascrosby5100]

Why are we saying that they were modernizing the language and calling it by a different name and calling that a King James Bible that is not the same thing. And the language was already archaic, are we going to agree on this when the Bible was published in 1611. Nobody was speaking in the Elizabethan English at that time and you can see it in the translators letters and their one to the king it's not written in the Elizabethan English so all the people aren't using it at that time. Why modernize what you can understand, why modernize or touch what God is using in a great way. Is it not factual to say that millions and millions of people were saved while the King James Bible as we know it during 1600 1700s 1800s 1900s, the point is it worked fine in the Elizabethan language, no modernization is needed. Can we not say it produced faith to move tens of thousands of men and women to leave home and comfort to the mission fields of the world "Faith cometh by hearing and hearing by the word of God" Sorry I'm not seeing that in any of the modernized versions in either area 100% not needed. Of course I'm going to defend the King James Bible and not let this subtlety of corruption slip in here because my children can read it and understand it and now my children's children can read it and understand it and people are saved all the time at the church from hearing it's words and messages in this very day, there is no need for modernization and nobody has any right to mess with the Bible that God is using! The English speaking world needs to get back to the old King James and may it be preached and believed and studied and given out like it once was, the drawing back from it is producing a very weak, worldly, unholy Christianity.

[@r0ky_M]

So the KJV was based largely on the Tyndale which Henry VIII had outlawed.

[@roberttassone7676]

Correct! Tyndale's NT was first included in the 1537 Matthew Bible which was the first authorized version, just one year after a Tyndale's martyrdom. Over 70% of Tyndale is retained in the KJV

[@flamelily8750]

I have never heard of the KJV being used to silence puritism.

[@paulrobinson9318]

I've always taken it as a given - King James bore no contradiction - and must have been ticked that his corrupted catholic Bible didn't disperse the Geneva for 50 years.

[@richardwebb2348]

@@paulrobinson9318 - James VI and I was baptised Roman Catholic, but brought up Presbyterian and leaned Anglican during his rule.

[@paulrobinson9318]

+@@richardwebb2348 NOT sure what your point is - for the Anglican church of Henry VIII was Roman Catholic in all but name - what doctrines did they change other then the infallibility of the Romish Pope? SO if he was Anglican he was English Catholic - Defender to the faith - the English Catholic faith - of which a huge number wanted to rejoin Rome - including many of those of the KJ editing committee. Funny how people take it in stride when maybe half the KJ editing committee wanted to return to Rome - yet Hort - who also wanted to return to Rome is attacked for so doing. AHHHH - the vagaries of English Bibles . . .

[@3choblast3r4]

Looking for a docu about king James. So I just search king James and one of the first videos a video of some black dudes that claim king James was secretly a black man LOL

[@lapidus9552]

Kang Jamez

[@haku22222]

I seen most of them admit he was evil man. But him having problems with Catholics & letting KJV be made is one that is a small window to do it. Not hard following the lines in track of how far other bibles have liberally changed things that are missing or thinking they can tweak it for their false side religion stances. Apostasy on every couple of blocks.

[@stevenfoulger6066]

@@haku22222 A translators job is to translate. It is not theology. Many of the verses that are "missing" #1 originated in the marginal notes that eventually made it into the text, and therefore were not part of the Greek manuscripts, #2 were the result of "homoeoteleuton" or "similar endings", #3 the result of "expansion of piety", as well as other reasons. The problem that KJV people have is that they've set the KJV up as THE standard by which they judge other translations instead of the manuscripts they were translated from. Erasmus himself spoke of the struggles he had and the pressure he was under to lean on the Latin Vulgate instead of the manuscripts. The KJV translators themselves also spoke of this same struggle in the "Preface to the reader".

[@charmainelamont2020]

Scotland was not "thoroughly reformed." Many parts of Scotland were untouched by the reformation and remained Catholic, and are still so today.

[@nasticanasta]

@Adam Bruce the moral of that story is DON'T be a catholic...

[@charmainelamont2020]

No, they were not ethnically cleansed. Catholicism survived in many parts and people worshipped in secret at Mass Stones in remote areas served by the heather priests who travelled the country saying Mass. The overwhelming majority of Catholics in the Highlands and islands are of Scots descent and in Edinburgh less than 10% are of Irish descent.

[@alecblunden8615]

@@nasticanasta A commendable sentiment were it not for the fact that in the pre - and post Nicene sense, the Greek term "Katholicos" meant preaching the entire corpus of the apostolic teaching. It never meant "universal" in an organisational sense. If the Roman church believed that, it would have used the well known Latin term "Universalis" when Bowdlerising the Greek teaching of one holy catholic and apostolic church. In the teaching of the foundational Christian churches - now the various Orthodox churches, the church exists in autocephalous congregations - where two or three are gathered in Christ's name and therefore in the presence of Christ and both united under Christ as the only head of the Church ("one"), holy the holiness of Christ alone and in our existence "in Christ" ("holy"), catholic in the comprehensively teaching of the apostolic tradition as recorded in Scripture (" catholic and apostolic in the meaning of the text") and avoidance of any other tradition. This means that most churches are "catholic" in the proper meaning of the term, with the probable exception of the one sect which has sought to subject Scripture and the apostolic tradition as taught by Paul and the other apostles (except James, who got things wrong) to the inconsistent and incompatible tradition of Platonic and Aristotlean philosophy. Ic

[@briancaldwell7305]

@Adam Bruce true!

[@internetenjoyer1044]

many paets were normal anglicans rather than the silly presbytarian stuff

[@felixfox5806]

People lie don't worry about why would they lie just know the difference and trust in the truth of the son of God and why he came in the first place. Then you'll feel the shame of this fallen world were in ✝️✝️✝️

[@jareddelgado4233]

Your lectures have really opened my mind to history! For someone who isn't able to go to seminary or bible college--these videos are a blessing to the laity of the local church​. God bless!

[@BloodBoughtMinistries]

Have a look at elearning.online-bible-college (just add . com) they seem to be pretty solid, and it is free. Blessings.

[@arthurralstonwakeupblackpe5940]

When it changes from Greek to Latin it's was the end of its true context just like the filique Claus...

[@bradenglass4753]

Filioque is biblical

[@Shelmerdine745]

Those are not myths. Legends, maybe, but not myths.

[@Shelmerdine745]

John Carboni That’s not right.

[@Shelmerdine745]

gillecroisd 92 I know what myths and legends are, that was why I posted my comment. The video title is Three myths....