Why You Should Reject Modern Textual Criticism Of The Bible

[@canadiankewldude]

God bless.

[@RyanGrandon]

Amen to that, brother.

[@SeanRhoadesChristopher]

Bad Commentators spoil the best of books, So God sends meat (they say) the devil cooks.

[@AJMacDonaldJr]

You don’t let text criticism borough in and cause you to lose faith in this book. I think Satan’s got more faith in this book than some of you. He knows what’s written in there! Friend we need to just love the word of God and believe every word. Just believe this book… it’ll get you to heaven!

[@REVNUMANEWBERN]

The "BOOK" doesn't get you to heaven, the PERSON of Christ does, HE is the saviour, NOT His text !

[@brianhaley4471]

@@REVNUMANEWBERN Jesu is the Word of God and his words are in The Book and obeying his words will get anyone to heaven. We are going to be judged by Jesus' words. Jesus plainly says that, but I guess you haven't read much of the Bible.

[@brianhaley4471]

Why can't I understand my KJV if I humble myself, pray to Jesus Christ, my Lord, and Savior for knowledge and understanding; seeking him to reveal his word; follow the hundreds of verses that say how to understand God's word? I've never read any Textual Criticism, hermeneutics, High/Low critical method tell me I could. It seems to me I can bypass all that stuff and go straight to God. Oh, I forgot, because Modern Biblical Textual Critics tells me the KJV is full of errors, so I must go to them. Well, there goes my entire life because they don't have any answers yet and admit they are still trying to figure it all out...."most scholars believe". (translates: none of them know!).

[@NewLifeOfAlbanyGa]

Amen!

[@Michael-uk3pj]

Let me get this straight You've never read any textual criticism? But the textual criticism you've never read tells you that the KJV is full of errors The other textual criticism you've also never read tells you you can't understand the Bible The final textual criticism you've still never read tells you you have to go to textual critics? You seem to be getting a lot of information from something you've never read...

[@brianhaley4471]

Come on!! Is that the best you can do??? Have YOU read any TC? If you have, show me their quotes where they say you can understand the Bible without TC or show me their quotes where they quote any of the many Bible verses that state a person CAN understand the scriptures. Have YOU read where the Bible clearly states you can understand the Bible. Do I have to quote those for YOU too?? Oh yeah, so, maybe I have never read the bible either?

[@brianhaley4471]

@@Michael-uk3pj Who said I never read any TC? Only YOU said that. If YOU have ever read any TC, you'd know what I said is true. Its in your face. They admit it what I said. Its no secret. They're proud of it. Its their position. Now, go read some TC and stop the grand standing baloney.

[@Michael-uk3pj]

@@brianhaley4471 You said it sir! You're first comment: "I've never read any textual criticism, hermeneutics, high/low critical method.... it seems to me I can bypass all that stuff and go straight to God" Your words not mine...

[@davidpinheiro9650]

It is a pity that this video does not present anything concrete against textual criticism. It is a pity that it does not provide a justification for the infallibility and divine inspiration of texts with historical errors and divergences between themselves, written many years after the events occurred, by people who did not experience them and who wrote in another language. It does not even address if the parts in which Paul says that "this is me saying and not Christ" are also inspired, going against the author himself. Or the part where Paul goes against his own teachings by performing Jewish rituals that he himself claims to be nullified in the new covenant.

[@NewLifeOfAlbanyGa]

I have many dozens of videos that do my friend.

[@davidpinheiro9650]

@@NewLifeOfAlbanyGa Can you, please, point me to some of them? Thanks.

[@brianhaley4471]

just maybe, the intent was not what YOU wanted, but what the Author of the video wanted to put into a 5 minute video.

[@davidpinheiro9650]

@@brianhaley4471 Maybe... Or maybe the author of the video does not want to face the issues I present. I am still waiting for him to show me the videos where he presents answers to my questions.

[@brianhaley4471]

@@davidpinheiro9650 Looks like you're still waiting. You'll be waiting a long time. Go do some of your own research. Maybe its not so one-side as you see it. Yes God is still the author. You're finding fault with the Bible where there is no fault. Fault finding about Paul. He had Timothy circumcized to win the Jews. He didn't believe it was for salvation, nor did he say it was a sin to get circumcized. He didn't violate. Your other accusation has a similar answer. Its wrong to demand someone to answer to you....and if they don't they are somehow wrong.

[@danob2904]

Which version is settled in heaven? Will the LORD GOD use modern critical bibles to judge man at the White Throne Judgement, if so, which of the thousands of versions? Are the Alexandrian or Vatican sourced bibles so much better than Christian sourced Bibles?

[@duswil3934]

NIV has 60k fewer words than the KJV. How do you know those words should have been included to begin with?

[@NewLifeOfAlbanyGa]

Studying manuscripts for many years.

[@duswil3934]

@@NewLifeOfAlbanyGa Do you have some example? An omission that changes the meaning of the text and isn’t supported by existing data?

[@NewLifeOfAlbanyGa]

@@duswil3934 Matthew 17:21 of 1 of 100s. You really ought to search the channel. I’ve done dozens of videos piecing this together over the years.

[@grantsmythe8625]

Jesus spoke of people wanting a sign that would shine, sparkle and convince them. The craving for a perfect Bible is akin to wanting a sign. Paul wanted to be perfect, he felt that he just couldn't live with his thorn in the flesh so he wanted Jesus to fix him up. Jesus refused. Jesus didn't need a perfect apostle. He needed a dedicated, faithful apostle. Same with the Bible. We don't need a perfect, infallible Bible. We need to be dedicated and faithful. The demand for and craving for a perfect, infallible Bible is an indication of resistance to faith in God, to unwillingness to risk trusting.

[@eumeliovazquezjr1630]

You should reject modern textual criticism because it is not KJVO, that is basically this while video.

[@NewLifeOfAlbanyGa]

Umm, no

[@eumeliovazquezjr1630]

Umm ok

[@brianhaley4471]

No, because its heresy. It's a secular system that says the Bible was translated naturally and doesn't mean what it says. It is a denial of a supernatural involvement by God to give us the Bible. That is the basis of Mod. Textual Criticism. Modern translators all have this same outlook; much different foundational beliefs than the KJV translators. Pick up any book on like "how to understand your bible". They don't cite any of the hundreds of Bible verses on how to understand the word of God. But the first chapter will say, "the KJV" is full of errors so go to the scholars, learn archaic Hebrew & Greek, get Lexicons & commentaries, etc.

[@KarlsKronicles]

FYI: Textual Criticism is not a hermenuetic. Higher Criticism or the Historical-Critical method are. Maybe that is what you're rejecting, and should. Textual Criticism is often called Lower Criticism and is not based on "presuppositions."

[@NewLifeOfAlbanyGa]

No, I’m rejecting textual criticism.

[@Rightlydividing-wx1xb]

@@NewLifeOfAlbanyGa You should at least read the letter to the reader included in the 1611KJV/revised Bishops Bible (Catholic written Pew bible). They had to choose from variants just like they have to today. Textual Criticism of the new testament has been practiced since the 2nd century. Do you not know this? The 1611 revisers of the Bishops Bible/KJV utterly refute KJV onlyism in clear, explicit language. They didn't have access to even 1 percent of the mss. we have today. They would utterly disagree with the Father of KJV onlyism, 7th day Adventist Benjamin G. Wilkinson, who founded this cult like belief in his 1930 book where he constantly quoted his false teacher Ellen G. White, and all KJV onlyists. I have a 1611, do you or all the other onlyists?

[@NewLifeOfAlbanyGa]

@@Rightlydividing-wx1xb I have the Translators to the Reader many times, and have reviewed it on the channel as well. I have reviewed the 1611 multiple times also.

[@Michael-uk3pj]

Reject it because NO consistent textual critical method will produce the KJV. Right?

[@Michael-uk3pj]

@Bronze modern textual criticism has nothing to do with simply oldest is best that's just ignorance! it's about weighing evidence, loving God with your mind and being honest about what the manuscripts actually say by listing the variants which BTW all the compilers of the TR did as did the committee producing the KJV in 1611 modern KJV advocates took the footnotes away because it questions their presupposition... All of which are biblical principles denied by KJV only advocates. Now, you show where the Bible limits preservation one translation thousands of years later in a language that didn't exist when the Bible was written... I'm waiting!

[@Michael-uk3pj]

@Bronze can you also show me King James Bible in scripture? How about textus receptus? How about English language? What about preserved in one translation thousands of years from now What about the doctrine of the 1611 is the best Or 1769 Or the 16th century Or Byzantine text? Or any of that I AM WAITING!!

[@Michael-uk3pj]

@Bronze as to preservation the Bible teaches that the TRUTH of God's word will be preserved to all God's people in all languages and all ages and that God's people will be preserved from Satan and evil doers and that God's promises to his people will never fail! It is not that one 17th century translation based on the text of a Roman Catholic priest translated by Anglicans under the direction of a homosexual English king in a language that would not exist for thousands of years would be be the only Bible for believers...

[@Michael-uk3pj]

@Bronze I don't think answered any of the things I asked you So I ask again where is King James version in the Bible or English or TR? You say something is "garbage" if you like but that just demonstrates you are you capable of engagement with the textual evidence So please bring a consistent argument as to why God not He is correct reading at 1 Tim 3:16 If argument is it's theologically fuller then is the KJV garbage for having son not God at John 1:18? Or lacking the Holy Spirit's role in inspiring scripture at acts 4:25? I don't dislike the KJV I do dislike people who attempt to force on everyone and attack every other because they don't want to look at evidence and they undermine whatthe KJV translators said...

[@Michael-uk3pj]

@Bronze my question is not stupid sir "Whoever says to his brother you fool is in danger of judgment"

[@KarlsKronicles]

Lot of mis-information and ignorance here. No where do textual critics charge God lost the Bible, Daniel Wallace, Bruce Metzger, even Bart Ehrman (an agnostic) and James R White.

[@NewLifeOfAlbanyGa]

Yes they do.

[@Ttcopp12rt]

@@NewLifeOfAlbanyGa Hello Sir, hope you are doing well. I am a Christian and I was attracted to the title of your video. I do believe it was informative, however I disagree with your reasoning - with all due respect...As someone who has engaged crucial topics with respected apologist of other faiths, I feel led to reach out to you and ask if you would kindly consider having a brotherly discussion on "Is Textual Criticism Heresy?" . I hope we can discuss it in a respectful, Christlike manner in a moderated setting. Perhaps on your channel or maybe another such as "The Trinity Channel" or another. I believe that it will be edifying because assertions can be addressed and challenged to provoke thought and encourage listeners to think Biblically...You can listen to my past debates on my channel. As you will hear, they are all done in love and with the utmost respect. Here is my recent debate I had with a Muslim on whether Paul contradicted Jesus kzbin.info/www/bejne/n2Sceo2BmbGtoJo ... Me email is: [e-mail]. Well brother, I hope to hear from you soon. Thank you! God Bless! - Luke

[@brianhaley4471]

Bart Ehrman wrote a book claiming exactly that. That's his position. The bible was lost and now is being rediscovered.

[@Michael-uk3pj]

What is modern? Was Erasmus not modern He was a humanist and his methodology was basically the same as is used today What about stephanus or beza They all engaged in textual criticism Where does the Bible say textual criticism became a sin after the 16 century?

[@brianhaley4471]

The Bible says in literally hundreds of places how to understand God's word. Textual Criticism mentions none of them. It is a secular system carried over from translating secular works such as Greek tragedies, Homer, Socrates, Plato, etc. to European languages. "Biblical" Textual Criticism uses the same secular methods, philosophy to, not translate, but rather, to say what the Bible REALLY says. BTC treats the Bible as a work of men and God doesn't have a hand in it. This is a prevalent theme throughout TC. Read any of their works. TC has hundreds of speculative translation scenarios that they claim occurred, have over 1500 terms & definitions for Seminary students to learn. I have never read one that cites what the Bible has to say about understanding the word of God (ex. The fear of the Lord is the beginning of wisdom, knowledge, and understanding). Why can't we question these Modern Scholars and their beloved Bible Textual Criticism? and challenge their claims about what the Bible REALLY says? Further, they use a 19th-century text based on roughly 3 manuscripts they claim are the best because they believe they are the oldest. They ignore thousands of others. They tell us we can't understand the Bible because it doesn't mean what it says. We must go to them. That's what they plainly, openly say.

[@Michael-uk3pj]

@@brianhaley4471 which textual critics did you read? I've never seen a believing text critic say I can't understand the Bible Also can you explain your conflation of text issues and translation issues? They're radically different! May I ask where you read that modern translations are based on around 3 texts? That claim is made either in ignorance or deliberate deception...

[@Michael-uk3pj]

@@brianhaley4471 Brian you make of claims about what textual critics say but in your other post you state you have never read any textual criticism Where are you getting your information? the fact you've never read any textual critic who states you can understand the Bible is hardly surprising as you've never read any textual critics period!!!

[@brianhaley4471]

@@Michael-uk3pj So, according to you, you have never read a believing text critic yourself. I have. All modern versions are based on the Alexandrian texts which is less than 10 and mostly 3 are used. Actually, 2 out of the three Sinaticus, Vaticanus, are most of what all modern versions are based on. That is common knowledge that NO scholar anywhere disputes. The charge of ignorance/deception is on you.

[@Michael-uk3pj]

@@brianhaley4471 Please back up what you said Provide some citations... Cite me which textual critic said no one but them can understand the Bible... Cite me which one said all modern translations are based on Aleph and B Are one which says all modern textual criticism is based on 10 manuscripts... Give me a name, book title and page numbers Thank you

[@ewankerr3011]

Bill Cooper is a reputable scholar? Yes, he is an entertaining writer and conspiracy theorist. But where did he get his post graduate qualifications? From a school that does not even website!

[@NewLifeOfAlbanyGa]

Cambridge for under grad wasn’t it?

[@danob2904]

Higher degrees give higher scholarship so higher criticism and higher authority... Just because Jesus said the Spirit will guide us into all truth, he probably needs corrected too. Where are Jesus' graduate or post-graduate degrees?

[@ewankerr3011]

Exactly. It reminds me of a conversation I had many years ago with a devout Roman catholic lady. During our discussion I made the point that Jesus sometimes said things that seemed to contradict the Church's teachings. It came down to who we should believe, Jesus or the Priest. She said we should believe the priest because he was an educated man.

[@canadiankewldude]

He is not talking about the American Bill Cooper, there is another man named Bill Cooper in England who is well educated and an author. You should look up the British man, no relation to each other.

[@ewankerr3011]

@@canadiankewldude : It is the British Bill Cooper I'm talking about as he was the one under discussion. He is recently deceased.

[@shawnstephens6795]

There is ZERO POSSIBILITY that the bible was hand written for 2000 years without errors, additions, ect happening...humans are corrupt, and just plain stupid in all seriousness. The ONLY WAY the KJV could possibly be the perfect word of God is if when God initially inspired his word he had the KJV in mind. But I don't really think God is as concerned about a book as we are...he probably thinks we are idiots for worrying about words in a book in a world surrounded by pain and suffering.

[@paulbaxter8178]

Excatly !

[@shawnstephens6795]

@Samson ...you believe the TR is exactly word for word what the originals said in all 66 books...flawlessly preserved for 2000 years???

[@paulbaxter8178]

Why am I arrogant ? Coz I'm open minded to other people's points of view ? Because I happy to read other versions before judging ? Because I'm born in the United Kingdom ? The country where the KJV originally came from before the US publishing companies corrupted the KJV ? Because I'm a KJV believer but appreciate it is still just a book ? Why because I appreciate that man has corrupted the true word of God no matter what version of bible it is ? Grow up!

[@shawnstephens6795]

@Samson… so you believe the KJV translators were divinely inspired???

[@stevie6621]

@@shawnstephens6795 KJV translators were not inspired, they were providentially guided.

[@minimumtasvik]

I call you Islam Brother.

[@aaronknight4800]

Reality we do live on a flat plane and not a spinning ball, globe, or oblate. Amazing how even globers can't agree. Don't you find that strange. It is scientifically provable and the Word supports it.

[@shawnstephens6795]

If the earth isn't spinning...then that would mean the rising sun would be the sun revolving around the earth.

[@GoatzombieBubba]

There is nothing in the Bible that says that Earth is flat.

[@Dachshund_Smokey]

@@GoatzombieBubba I have seen people talking about this, saying that the world is flat, one of the verses they try and use is Revolution 7:1

[@aaronknight4800]

It most certainly does. I've attached a debate on Biblical cosmology. Don't be sheep. kzbin.info/www/bejne/hHrRn6Ktls-Lg5I

[@aaronknight4800]

@@shawnstephens6795 that's exactly what the sun does.