are actually baring false witness on Gods inspired word God defends the new king james bible because it is the bible. For someone to stand up and say its currupt your teachings are currupt and someone should make you step down because your leading just sheep who are going to listen to you of whati s acruate youre like chickens with your heads cut off lol all sniffing each others ass amen to that.
THESE GUYS look like a bunch of white hicks no offence. seriously the king james bible is not the most accurate version out there there is nothing wrong with the new king james version you hypocrites out there saying it is currupted
I have followed this man's vid with the KJV, the NKJV, Strong's Exhaustive Concordance & a Websters Comp. Dictionary. And it appears that the NKJV is actually closer to the original language than the KJV is. It is the KJV that has changed he words & not the other way around. His problem is that He probably doesn't speak any other language and He was brought up with the Ole English Bible and has not really done his real homework. Check it out for yourselves Christians!
i dont understand what makes these writers of these new versions think they are correct in telling God what he said. They are misquoting God and trying to pass it off as truth
Gail Riplinger has been DIVORCED TWICE and married TREE times as a "Christian"!!! Doesn't that concern you?
Tell me, have you EVER read the NIV, or the NKJV, or the NET, or the NASB??? Have you ever read what the KJV 1611 Translators wrote? Does it concern you at all that the Anglican "Church" (which was started by a King who wanted to divorce and remarry) gave you your tainted KJV with all of its ecclesiastical language to appease both Anglcan and R. Catholic alike??? Wake UP !
I love how this guy cites 1 Corinthians 2:11 as an example of how the NKJV is getting rid of men. Here's the whole verse from my NKJV printed in 2000: "For what man knows the things of man except the spirit of the man which is in him? Even so no one knows the things of God except the Spirit of God." Though going through the entire verse in all his examples would have been cumbersome, when read in context, some of the verses don't exclude the sex, check out 1 Cor. 7:36 for yourself and decide.
The best way to combat the New Age Deception of KJV Onlyism is to use the 1611 KJV. The preface to the 1611 and it's diabolical artwork along with its more than 8,000 margin notes, completely undermines KJV Onlyism!!! I have personally counted at least 13 places in the1611 where the Septuagint is cited (of which these KJV Only advocates say the Septuagint is a "fraud"). How can any thinking person believe Gipp or Ruckman or Riplinger or Marrs, etc.???
You bible coddlers should listen to the series of excellent videos by DeistPaladin on YouTube. Specifically, his extensive "Skeptic Bible Study" series.
When I read slave of God I understand it as servent of God so there is no issue hear. Its a matter of how you percieve what a slave is. God is love so the slave hear would not mean slave in a nagative way. It means labering for God in a diligent matter and I am sure that the word servent would apply also so there is no issue hear. As long as you get out of it what it means there is no issue.
But my point is that they changed it..why? it was understood the way it was and thats my gripe with the NKJV...they change things when they dont need to for reasons that are their own. I to read it that way but its the concept of the reason of the change that baffles me. By changing the wording it changes the meaning to those who are new to the scripture so in a way they are being misleading. My KJV has never lead me astray so why would I want to go to a NKJV that changes the meanings unjustly?
Of corse it is hard to figure out why some words were changed but that is not proof that the change was incorerect. I have went through the bible at least 20 times and have read both the nkjv and kjv and have gotten the same exact message form them both. I have no doubts about the nkjv. It was maid inorder to help people understand the sctipturs better. I will give you an example in my next comment. For all I have seen there is no maret to all the hype and worry about the nkjv.
Matthew 17/21 KJV-Howbeit this kind goeth not out but by prayer and fasting.
Matthew 17/21 NKJV-However, this kind does not go out except by prayer and fasting.
With the KJV questions arise like what dos Howbeit mean? Why say goeth when you can just say go? (Not out but by prayer and fasting)...sounds like there talking back words and it is confusing at first glance. I believe this kjv language is more likely to confuse a new christen than anything in the NKJV.
Why are you KJV Onlyists being taught by Gail Riplinger - A WOMAN??? Also, did you know that she has been married 3 times, as has Peter pro-abort Ruckman?
The NKJV does NOT remove "Lord" when the title refers to Jesus Christ or God the Father but in reference to mere man. Also, the KJV has "God forbid" 15 times in the NT when NOT ONCE does the Greek have the word "Theos". The KJV is a very faulty version that is not faithful to the original Hebrew and Greek - they didn't even know koine Greek!
datz a very selfish act of this man of God.Instead of u focusing on souls.u are sitting here talking about bible versions.May God 4give u and may u have a better perspective and vision of why u are to minister, Dr Gibb.Knowledge puffs up,have u read it in ur Bible.Just very disgusted watching you.souls are dying and perishing!!!man get very serious cos u are a joke
I would usually agree but arguing over witch religious docgma written by psycotic cavemen thousands of years ago is better is like a stupidity deathmatch.
Why would you use the KJV as the absolute authority? Why not compare the NKJV with the Hebrew and Greek transcripts? It seems very deceptive. I'm a big fan of the KJV, but it appears to me that you are misleading people to promote your agenda. Soli Deo Gloria.
I have a copy of the NKJV and on the title page is the Mobius symbol (serpent noad). This is an occult symbol popularized by satanist Aleister Crowley, it is an ancient depiction of 666 and was featured on the cover of the rock album THE PRESENCE by Led Zeppelin It was also featured on the cover of the book, THE AQUARIAN CONSPIRACY by New Age author Marilyn Ferguson. Apparantly some Christians believe this symbol represents the Godhead, which is in violation of Acts 17:29-Continued..
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
Ever think publishers aren't necessarily thinking of the Biblical text, but just design decisions? You know even the names of the days in the week are occult in origin, does that mean you attribute any ill meaning to "Sunday", or "Monday", etc.?
It could be thought that many people just held that little symbol to be pretty; and if people felt otherwise, they could write-in and say "please remove this from the Bible", which it seems they did.
You are greatly confused as to the meaning of the symbol on the NKJ bible. What ever other meanings other people may have attributed with that symbol has nothing to do with what it means when on the NKJV. Let me enlightening you. The symbol is an ancient symbol for the Trinity.
I agree that people in the past have misused that symbol just like people have misused the symbol of the cross. However I do not attribute the cross to evil because some crazy people misused it. I do not attribute evil to the trinity symbol just because some people mis used it.
After some ferther research I found that this symbol is a (triquetra) which was the symbol that was later used by Christians as a symbol of the Trinity (Father, Son and Holy Spirit). This appropriation was particularly easy because the triquetra conveniently incorporated three shapes that could be interpreted as Christian symbols.
This was a fun video to watch, although I skipped a few minutes here and there. The NKJV is not really a proper revision of the AV. The ASV of 1901 and the NASB are probably best for study purposes. I do like to compare so I have 26 translations.
I use blueletterbible (dot) com to compare many translations simultaneously and it usually confirms the kjv and nkjvb to be closest to the greek/hebrew..
1Cor:1:27: But God hath chosen the foolish things of the world to confound the wise; and God hath chosen the weak things of the world to confound the things which are mighty;
28: And base things of the world, and things which are despised, hath God chosen, yea, and things which are not, to bring to nought things that are:
What a silly argument. Is God's first language Elizabethan English? To run your logic to its full, shouldn't all believers be speaking Biblical Hebrew? Or is it Biblical Greek?
You should listen to some exposes of the modern versions, and what a mess they are.
Why the hatred for the KJV? Your first irrational swipe at it (actually, its devotees, which is even more bizarre) produced nothing, so you take another. What gives?
the point is kjv is A mans version. it is outdated English that those who declare that it is the only word of God are sadly mistaken it was written by men. the only actual word of God is written in Greek/Aramaic or Hebrew so there you go. if you want to preach out of a 15th century bible one should speak like that.
I have a photoprint of the entire 1611 first printing, and the only things revised are the spelling has been modernized and the type-setting errors corrected.
Your point of contention is rather picayune; what's more, it logically leaves you with no word of God and with the same problem for which you're chastizing KJV-onlyists: the original Greek doesn't exist and would need serious modernizing if it did.
And would you require its believers to speak Koine Greek?
If the original Hebrew and Greek are the real deal, then your god isn't strong enough to keep his word. You're appealing to something that doesn't even exist.
Who wrote even the first Hebrew and Greek texts? Men. Men aren't inspired, and languages aren't inspired. GOD'S WORD is inspired.
But the problem with your argument is that insisting on the original texts only leaves you with the exact same problem. Since they don't exist, then, by your argument, the Far Side comic strip has an as equal a claim to be scripture as the 66 books, since we'd have no way of confirming what they said, or confirming that they are scripture even if they were re-discovered.
I'm a proud owner of the complete Far Side collection. I recommend his Prehistoric History if you haven't seen it yet.
That aside, if you think God's word is as good as the original manuscripts, then you have no Bible. The KJV is based on the Textus Receptus family, of which the originals don't exist, either. But it is thoroughly quoted to satisfaction within mere years of the Pentecost. And by faith (meaning I can't prove it), I believe God's promise to keep His word forever (Ps 12:6-7).
Where in the Scriptures is the King James Bible mentioned? Where does it say that God would only preserve His Word in one Bible? Where does it say God would preserve His Word in English?
If it's not in the Bible, it is not sound doctrine.
Now compare the KJV to the Geneva
PersevereDespiteThem 9 months ago in playlist Bible Versions
Why is it that Satan only attacks the KJV version?
vrghiks 1 year ago
are actually baring false witness on Gods inspired word God defends the new king james bible because it is the bible. For someone to stand up and say its currupt your teachings are currupt and someone should make you step down because your leading just sheep who are going to listen to you of whati s acruate youre like chickens with your heads cut off lol all sniffing each others ass amen to that.
InTheseBooks 1 year ago
THESE GUYS look like a bunch of white hicks no offence. seriously the king james bible is not the most accurate version out there there is nothing wrong with the new king james version you hypocrites out there saying it is currupted
InTheseBooks 1 year ago
sorry dpr jones but it looks like his older brother l000l
robthesamplist 2 years ago
I have followed this man's vid with the KJV, the NKJV, Strong's Exhaustive Concordance & a Websters Comp. Dictionary. And it appears that the NKJV is actually closer to the original language than the KJV is. It is the KJV that has changed he words & not the other way around. His problem is that He probably doesn't speak any other language and He was brought up with the Ole English Bible and has not really done his real homework. Check it out for yourselves Christians!
OurGr8God 2 years ago
i dont understand what makes these writers of these new versions think they are correct in telling God what he said. They are misquoting God and trying to pass it off as truth
wauft 2 years ago
Gail Riplinger has been DIVORCED TWICE and married TREE times as a "Christian"!!! Doesn't that concern you?
Tell me, have you EVER read the NIV, or the NKJV, or the NET, or the NASB??? Have you ever read what the KJV 1611 Translators wrote? Does it concern you at all that the Anglican "Church" (which was started by a King who wanted to divorce and remarry) gave you your tainted KJV with all of its ecclesiastical language to appease both Anglcan and R. Catholic alike??? Wake UP !
JimDeferio 2 years ago
I love how this guy cites 1 Corinthians 2:11 as an example of how the NKJV is getting rid of men. Here's the whole verse from my NKJV printed in 2000: "For what man knows the things of man except the spirit of the man which is in him? Even so no one knows the things of God except the Spirit of God." Though going through the entire verse in all his examples would have been cumbersome, when read in context, some of the verses don't exclude the sex, check out 1 Cor. 7:36 for yourself and decide.
luchan988 2 years ago
The best way to combat the New Age Deception of KJV Onlyism is to use the 1611 KJV. The preface to the 1611 and it's diabolical artwork along with its more than 8,000 margin notes, completely undermines KJV Onlyism!!! I have personally counted at least 13 places in the1611 where the Septuagint is cited (of which these KJV Only advocates say the Septuagint is a "fraud"). How can any thinking person believe Gipp or Ruckman or Riplinger or Marrs, etc.???
JimDeferio 2 years ago
because we think?
wauft 2 years ago
You bible coddlers should listen to the series of excellent videos by DeistPaladin on YouTube. Specifically, his extensive "Skeptic Bible Study" series.
Turandot29 2 years ago
the nkjv changed the word SERVENT of GOD to SLAVE of GOD. we are to be servents of God not slaves to it.
gurgle1624 2 years ago
When I read slave of God I understand it as servent of God so there is no issue hear. Its a matter of how you percieve what a slave is. God is love so the slave hear would not mean slave in a nagative way. It means labering for God in a diligent matter and I am sure that the word servent would apply also so there is no issue hear. As long as you get out of it what it means there is no issue.
truth96130 2 years ago
But my point is that they changed it..why? it was understood the way it was and thats my gripe with the NKJV...they change things when they dont need to for reasons that are their own. I to read it that way but its the concept of the reason of the change that baffles me. By changing the wording it changes the meaning to those who are new to the scripture so in a way they are being misleading. My KJV has never lead me astray so why would I want to go to a NKJV that changes the meanings unjustly?
gurgle1624 2 years ago
Of corse it is hard to figure out why some words were changed but that is not proof that the change was incorerect. I have went through the bible at least 20 times and have read both the nkjv and kjv and have gotten the same exact message form them both. I have no doubts about the nkjv. It was maid inorder to help people understand the sctipturs better. I will give you an example in my next comment. For all I have seen there is no maret to all the hype and worry about the nkjv.
truth96130 2 years ago
Matthew 17/21 KJV-Howbeit this kind goeth not out but by prayer and fasting.
Matthew 17/21 NKJV-However, this kind does not go out except by prayer and fasting.
With the KJV questions arise like what dos Howbeit mean? Why say goeth when you can just say go? (Not out but by prayer and fasting)...sounds like there talking back words and it is confusing at first glance. I believe this kjv language is more likely to confuse a new christen than anything in the NKJV.
truth96130 2 years ago
I respect your comment and was surprised to see it responded to after 7 months. Cant believe its been that long.
gurgle1624 2 years ago
Fucking parasites of society.
oriondos 2 years ago
All bibles are rediculous not just one version.
swisher1248 2 years ago
You cant trust the bible AT ALL,
it was a fireside book of myth to start with
and it has been degraded steadily ever since.
It is so vague, so internally inconsistent,
so filled with scientific and historical error
and so many contradictions
that it is totally worthless for any sort
of instruction or moral guidance.
Imaginefree69 3 years ago
Why are you KJV Onlyists being taught by Gail Riplinger - A WOMAN??? Also, did you know that she has been married 3 times, as has Peter pro-abort Ruckman?
The NKJV does NOT remove "Lord" when the title refers to Jesus Christ or God the Father but in reference to mere man. Also, the KJV has "God forbid" 15 times in the NT when NOT ONCE does the Greek have the word "Theos". The KJV is a very faulty version that is not faithful to the original Hebrew and Greek - they didn't even know koine Greek!
JimDeferio 3 years ago
I personally don't have anything against the NKJV or the KJV. Both are excellent versions of the Bible.
USMuscleCarsrock 3 years ago
Comment removed
KGreer84 3 years ago
Comment removed
KGreer84 3 years ago
So, the KJV bible is the proper one?
carbs101 3 years ago
Yes, that's right. The KJV is the Holy Bible.
tallswede68 3 years ago 5
The KJV is just one of many good Bible translations.
TheDoctor394 2 years ago
datz a very selfish act of this man of God.Instead of u focusing on souls.u are sitting here talking about bible versions.May God 4give u and may u have a better perspective and vision of why u are to minister, Dr Gibb.Knowledge puffs up,have u read it in ur Bible.Just very disgusted watching you.souls are dying and perishing!!!man get very serious cos u are a joke
stepdi 3 years ago
i love how every comment that has any counterpoint to everything mentioned above gets thumbs down...
what is the point of posting this on YouTube? It does nothing to spread the saving message of Jesus Christ.
Jesus's power should be the focus.
Go ahead and give this a thumbs down.
stephenknowlton 3 years ago
Arguement and debate are the signs of hope fior a better tomorrow.
mtfury1968 2 years ago
I would usually agree but arguing over witch religious docgma written by psycotic cavemen thousands of years ago is better is like a stupidity deathmatch.
swisher1248 2 years ago
2011 -- 400-yr anniversary of the KJV
DominicMetal1979 3 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
do you kjv only go into thine hometh depotheth, do thou sayest give of thou 2 by 4s 6 cubits long?
luvdady 3 years ago
Why would you use the KJV as the absolute authority? Why not compare the NKJV with the Hebrew and Greek transcripts? It seems very deceptive. I'm a big fan of the KJV, but it appears to me that you are misleading people to promote your agenda. Soli Deo Gloria.
bigfatcalvinist 3 years ago
Wrong about some doctrine like the rapture and other, but a good video nevertheless.
MannaVestimentary 3 years ago
DRbiohazard 3 years ago 4
Cont'
Acts 17:29 "Forasmuch then as we are the off-
spring of God, we ought not to think that the
Godhead is like unto gold, or silver, or stone, graven by art and man's device."
I believe I read somewhere that the NKJV no
longer bears this symbol. My copy is from
1996.
DRbiohazard 3 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
Ever think publishers aren't necessarily thinking of the Biblical text, but just design decisions? You know even the names of the days in the week are occult in origin, does that mean you attribute any ill meaning to "Sunday", or "Monday", etc.?
It could be thought that many people just held that little symbol to be pretty; and if people felt otherwise, they could write-in and say "please remove this from the Bible", which it seems they did.
infinitelink 3 years ago
Big difference between days of the week &
linking occult symbols to God's Word. Intent-
ional or not; it represents a major lack of
discernment.
DRbiohazard 3 years ago
Comment removed
truth96130 2 years ago
You are greatly confused as to the meaning of the symbol on the NKJ bible. What ever other meanings other people may have attributed with that symbol has nothing to do with what it means when on the NKJV. Let me enlightening you. The symbol is an ancient symbol for the Trinity.
truth96130 2 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
I agree that people in the past have misused that symbol just like people have misused the symbol of the cross. However I do not attribute the cross to evil because some crazy people misused it. I do not attribute evil to the trinity symbol just because some people mis used it.
truth96130 2 years ago
After some ferther research I found that this symbol is a (triquetra) which was the symbol that was later used by Christians as a symbol of the Trinity (Father, Son and Holy Spirit). This appropriation was particularly easy because the triquetra conveniently incorporated three shapes that could be interpreted as Christian symbols.
truth96130 2 years ago
This was a fun video to watch, although I skipped a few minutes here and there. The NKJV is not really a proper revision of the AV. The ASV of 1901 and the NASB are probably best for study purposes. I do like to compare so I have 26 translations.
DrStevenz 3 years ago
I use blueletterbible (dot) com to compare many translations simultaneously and it usually confirms the kjv and nkjvb to be closest to the greek/hebrew..
tolleck 2 years ago
That aside, if you think God's word is as good as the original manuscripts, then you have no Bible.
good point the remake is better than the original.
lawdestroyer 3 years ago
yeah this turkey named lucifer thought he was cooler than this cat jehovah well they was fightin and then dude threw him out .
lawdestroyer 3 years ago
oh my god, I actually thought that was funny.
GuardianofTwilight 3 years ago
??
which part?
lawdestroyer 3 years ago
give me a thee! give me a thou!give me a thart!
what that spell kjv!
how about speaking the real word of God there:
open thine bibles to john and readest thou to verse 4th and proceed to the next chaptereth.
oh wait you dont speak ""english from the 16th century?
lawdestroyer 3 years ago
1Cor:1:27: But God hath chosen the foolish things of the world to confound the wise; and God hath chosen the weak things of the world to confound the things which are mighty;
28: And base things of the world, and things which are despised, hath God chosen, yea, and things which are not, to bring to nought things that are:
29: That no flesh should glory in his presence.
kjvonly01 3 years ago
practiceth what thine preacheth.
lawdestroyer 3 years ago
What a silly argument. Is God's first language Elizabethan English? To run your logic to its full, shouldn't all believers be speaking Biblical Hebrew? Or is it Biblical Greek?
You should listen to some exposes of the modern versions, and what a mess they are.
IanNila 3 years ago
the kjv is still a man made translation, so if you want to spout off about modern translations
then your kjv is one.
lawdestroyer 3 years ago
Why the hatred for the KJV? Your first irrational swipe at it (actually, its devotees, which is even more bizarre) produced nothing, so you take another. What gives?
IanNila 3 years ago
the point is kjv is A mans version. it is outdated English that those who declare that it is the only word of God are sadly mistaken it was written by men. the only actual word of God is written in Greek/Aramaic or Hebrew so there you go. if you want to preach out of a 15th century bible one should speak like that.
lawdestroyer 3 years ago
I have a photoprint of the entire 1611 first printing, and the only things revised are the spelling has been modernized and the type-setting errors corrected.
Your point of contention is rather picayune; what's more, it logically leaves you with no word of God and with the same problem for which you're chastizing KJV-onlyists: the original Greek doesn't exist and would need serious modernizing if it did.
And would you require its believers to speak Koine Greek?
IanNila 3 years ago
if you want Gods version then yes. otherwise you have nothing but a "modern translation"
made by men.
if you want the real deal learn hebrew and greek.
in other words the kjv is still a mans version.
lawdestroyer 3 years ago
If the original Hebrew and Greek are the real deal, then your god isn't strong enough to keep his word. You're appealing to something that doesn't even exist.
Who wrote even the first Hebrew and Greek texts? Men. Men aren't inspired, and languages aren't inspired. GOD'S WORD is inspired.
IanNila 3 years ago
my point exactly the kjv guys were not inspired as those who wrote the scriptures were.
and anything but the original texts are nothing but modern translations from men.
lawdestroyer 3 years ago
But the problem with your argument is that insisting on the original texts only leaves you with the exact same problem. Since they don't exist, then, by your argument, the Far Side comic strip has an as equal a claim to be scripture as the 66 books, since we'd have no way of confirming what they said, or confirming that they are scripture even if they were re-discovered.
IanNila 3 years ago
Since they don't exist, then, by your argument, the Far Side comic strip has an as equal a claim to be scripture as the 66 books,
gary larson has brought me many mornings of laughter. almost as much as the whole "they don't exist"
then where did the text for the kjv come from?
they make it up as they went?
the bottom line is do you want a mans translation? or do you want the real deal?
kjv is a modern mans translation.
lawdestroyer 3 years ago
I'm a proud owner of the complete Far Side collection. I recommend his Prehistoric History if you haven't seen it yet.
That aside, if you think God's word is as good as the original manuscripts, then you have no Bible. The KJV is based on the Textus Receptus family, of which the originals don't exist, either. But it is thoroughly quoted to satisfaction within mere years of the Pentecost. And by faith (meaning I can't prove it), I believe God's promise to keep His word forever (Ps 12:6-7).
IanNila 3 years ago 2
have you ever showed the far side to someone and they scratch their head because they don get it?
same with kjv some just dont get it.
lawdestroyer 3 years ago
if the original Hebrew and Greek are the real deal, then your god isn't strong enough to keep his word.
what was the original written text Jive?
(no offense meant)
lawdestroyer 3 years ago
I think Gipp needs to get a Grip on reality.
lawdestroyer 3 years ago
Where in the Scriptures is the King James Bible mentioned? Where does it say that God would only preserve His Word in one Bible? Where does it say God would preserve His Word in English?
If it's not in the Bible, it is not sound doctrine.
takealongline 3 years ago
I think the NRSV or the NET are the best translations while the KJV is the most beautious. However, the KJV is not the best Bible to study from.
boboe511 3 years ago
This guy is clueless...its like a cult.
boboe511 3 years ago
Your backup for this claim, please.
IanNila 3 years ago
And you HAVE a clue? You'll accept ANYTHING but God's word, in it's first English form.
alvon911 3 years ago
there were a few earlier English Bibles before KJV. You can find them in Christian book stores.
frangipani1974 2 years ago
ἄνθρωπος = mankind, a person, a being, one.
ἀνήρ = male gender.
sugkrino 3 years ago
ἐν ποίᾳ ἐξουσίᾳ
sugkrino 3 years ago