There are plenty of pro lems with the king James bible. However it is the one I read. Buy a n interlinear bible with the Stephen's greek text with the corresponding king James text. Plenty of English words improperly supplied where no greek word os translated. Every single italicized word is added by man. And I've found English word translation that 180 degrees from what the greek words definition is.
The original Word of God as spoken by holy men of God by revelation was as pure as it gets. Kings James bible is just a translation. Do a bit more studying on your own don't take somebody else's word for it.
Thank you for that reality check.
There seems to be a borderline cult of worship around that translation. I'm not even saying it couldn't be the best one out there, though there's no reason it couldn't be modernized without removing things.
Revelation 22:16 “I Jesus have sent mine angel to testify unto you these things in the churches. I am the root and the offspring of David, and the bright and morning star.” King James Version (KJV)
Canon isn't necessarily 'holy books' such as John, Mark etc. Although they should be read for Christians really trying to understand lineage of The Faith.
Look at Maccabees. Apart of Canon Scripture but not in The Bible. Cause the people were more used as a way to see the way of life pre-Jesus. To see the struggles of those who lived their life to please God. (or rather follow him) But not necessarily relevant to the Story of God, Jesus and the faith of Christianity.
Atleast thats my understanding, I am still learning though and dont claim to be an expert.
Just want to add in context of Maccabees: The first two books are considered canonical by the Catholic Church and the first three books are considered canonical by the Eastern Orthodox Church
Didn't the KJV remove a very important part about praying + fasting? Fasting is very important to keep the spirit alive but they don't want people to know that for some reason.
There are plenty of pro lems with the king James bible. However it is the one I read. Buy a n interlinear bible with the Stephen's greek text with the corresponding king James text. Plenty of English words improperly supplied where no greek word os translated. Every single italicized word is added by man. And I've found English word translation that 180 degrees from what the greek words definition is.
The original Word of God as spoken by holy men of God by revelation was as pure as it gets. Kings James bible is just a translation. Do a bit more studying on your own don't take somebody else's word for it.
Thank you for that reality check.
There seems to be a borderline cult of worship around that translation. I'm not even saying it couldn't be the best one out there, though there's no reason it couldn't be modernized without removing things.
One thing in this that blew me away was the part about The Book of Mark.
Mark has 678 verses in KJV of The Bible.
In every other version of the Bible, they take out 12 verses of The Book of Mark. leaving it with 666 verses.
Do not be deceived.
It also points out how Lucifer is called the Morning Star in KJV, cast down from Heaven.
In Other versions it mentions Jesus as the Morning Star. Calling Jesus, Lucifer. How sick can these people be? Deceiving Christians to such blasphemy.
Truth is Christ is doing some great work on this front.
Enjoy.
https://youtu.be/avG0piVeYiQ?si=tWrw3zuVa7UMGqt3
https://kjvcode.com/
All data presented can be cross checked via:
https://www.purebiblesearch.com "
More resources.
So you would say the protestant bible is superior because it includes content otherwise omitted?
Interesting.
Also, here's Mark with 678 verses: https://catholic-resources.org/Bible/NT-Statistics-Greek.htm
More examples than that given in the videos posted. If there is one mistake, there may as well be a thousand.
KJV is the only perfect Bible.
It seems your arguments are on very shaky ground.
No you arnt watching the videos.
One version calls Lucifer the Morning star instead of Lucifer. Then says that Jesus is the morning star.
Understand?
Watched the video.
WHICH greek texts did they base their 1600 translation on? Spolier: The ones from the 1500 reformers.
Sorry if you don't like it, but the codex vaticanus is from the year 400.
And Acts 8:38 is most certainly in the catholic bible.
That video is nonsense. Stop trusting randoms on the internet.
Its in the KJV though? Whats your point.
Your video at 11:00 says it's not there in other translations and make it out to be a unique truth only found in the kjv.
Or did you not watch the video?
Why do Protestant bibles missing seven books that had been part of Canon for 1500 years?
Canon isn't necessarily 'holy books' such as John, Mark etc. Although they should be read for Christians really trying to understand lineage of The Faith.
Look at Maccabees. Apart of Canon Scripture but not in The Bible. Cause the people were more used as a way to see the way of life pre-Jesus. To see the struggles of those who lived their life to please God. (or rather follow him) But not necessarily relevant to the Story of God, Jesus and the faith of Christianity.
Atleast thats my understanding, I am still learning though and dont claim to be an expert.
Just want to add in context of Maccabees: The first two books are considered canonical by the Catholic Church and the first three books are considered canonical by the Eastern Orthodox Church
The King James bible is the preserved Word of God. All the other translations are perversions and should be avoided at all costs.
That Bible is nonsense and manipulated beyond belief
I really enjoyed this video about the King James also https://youtu.be/SNgYt4GZ9S8?si=-Ex4VNUwK43aRehU
Didn't the KJV remove a very important part about praying + fasting? Fasting is very important to keep the spirit alive but they don't want people to know that for some reason.
No, its still in there