YouTube - Broadcast Yourself.

And why do those of you who don't believe, read, love and try to live by the Bible even bother to enter this debate??

Anyone can watch both of these videos on youtube IN context and in their intirety and easily see that the only double talk is from the idiot who took time to create this video.

8guitars4me 2 weeks ago

0:32

"At"

LOL

bornagainjessie 1 month ago

Did you spell inconsistencies wrong just for irony?

timmoreland 1 month ago

@jhedd225 Exactly, These video's are clearly taken out of context. In the second video for those of us who know the history of the 1611 KJV knows there were spelling errors in the original and that was precisely what he was talking about. Come on folks (youv'e) got to do better than this. Do you who made this think we are all mindless zombies out here?

patrickgantt 2 months ago

Isn't it odd that the fundies, evangelicals and Calvinists of the 17th century scorned the 1611 bible and stuck to the "truly protestant", "reformation" Geneva Bible.

So WHY, specifically, were those fundies and evangelicals wrong, but their current descendants aren't. Why do the current lot prefer the royalist, "kingly", "divine right of kings" translation over the Calvinist one? We will wait in vain for cogent reasons from these ignoramuses, I think.

Arbuthnotification 2 months ago

Oh god! There are still KJVers out there.

Pluck thy eye out Jack. You can't tell me you've never lusted.

HellRehab 2 months ago

@jhedd225

that's why he said that the KJV was "Fairly error free" not "error free" until 1769.?

crawforda1769 3 months ago

What’s your source video for Jack’s admittance on the error in the KJB?

askegg 3 months ago

@askegg

I sent you the video.

crawforda1769 3 months ago

This will be what finally decimates the IFB movement. Fighting among yourselves over what you really agree on. GLad I left. GLad to be SBC. No I am not KJV only anymore. I went SBC first, then changed on versions. No it wasnt in reverse. Alot of what IFBers say about the SBC is a complete lie

hatfieldadam 4 months ago

@hatfieldadam

yeah that's what puts the INEDEPENDENT in the independent Baptist Church, the ability to refute those who are either in error or acting hypocritical. Personally I'm growing tired of some of the inconsistancies in the IFB movement too. Jack Schaap doesn't represent me nor what I stand for as a Christian.

crawforda1769 4 months ago

Nope. Because Ezra is a prophetic book of God's Bible. King James is no prophet, yet there is a TRANSLATION named after him called the KJV which some folks claim is the only true Word of God.

tommym202 4 months ago

Actually Ezra is a historical book not a prophetical book. And just because Ezra, Isaiah, Jeremiah, Amos, Obadiah, Matthew, Mark, Luke's names are what the books of the Bible are called don't make them less inspired. Having King James' name on the Bible does not make the King James BIBLE less inspired.

theyoungbaptists 4 months ago

Excuse me. Ezra was a priest, not a prophet. And yes, all of the books of the Bible are Inspired. None of those guys ever put their own name on an entire VERSION or TRANSLATION of the Bible, though. I read the King James TRANSLATION myself, but the KJV is not the only good English translation. Even if the 1611 KJV was inspired, our modern KJV is not even the original KJV!!!

By the way, God did not breathe in English.

tommym202 4 months ago

@tommym202 I'm sorry but I've done in depth study and the only reliable version is the KJV. The other versions we're made with the intention of profit. The KJB is God's preserved word. Old Hebrew is a dead language. It cannot still be preserved in the original languages because those languages are dead. God said he'd preserve his word. It was made clear in Jeremiah that a copy is just as inspired as an original. If it is not inspired, then we don't have an inspired, preserved Bible.

TheConservativesrock 2 months ago