Do You CORRECT your Bible with Greek and Hebrew? STOP !!! (Calciumboy Mirror)

[MrTangodeep]

u are comfused and ur comfusing ppl too. Jesus is the sheepherd remmember so like Kind David says he leads me through psalm 23. u just play smart ass

[Tigersspond]

KJV 1611 only. No matter what, the other bibles are twisted

[vudumojo]

@Tigersspond Amen to that one

[vudumojo]

@truthhitmanisback When the translators wre in the process of translating from the Hebrew and Greek into English, did they have "Bible dictionaries"? ...or, was it their job to use the dictionary definitions which existed at that time in each the existing languages in order to translate them as closely as possible to the English language?

Stop correcting your Bible.

It's interesting about Ham, but throw your Bible dictionaries away and your lexicons. 

[vudumojo]

...Also I should add that I am not saying not to use a dictionary; I am saying use a REAL dictionary of the English language. The closest one for use with the Bible is the oldest Webster 1828.

There's a version online for free use at 1828-dictionary (dot) com.

Enjoy :)

[truthhitmanisback]

@vudumojo You said  " it's interesting about Ham," but could you tell me what you find interesting ???

[Licmycat]

ThXs!

[vudumojo]

@Licmycat :)

[MrTangodeep]

I dont study bible I just read it and i always pray night and day. if u realy want to sworship God and son The life Jesus: then God will helps u find the way Just clean ur heart fight. not wish the benefit of this world. dont get jelous of this dirty wealthy ppl and their seems to be peacefull life, dont give up. just use ur brain the sheepheard lord Jesus is always with us and u will feel it. Psalm my favor remember the mans light is jesus. u got em u never fall down into the deep cuz u can c.

[Tigersspond]

@MrTangodeep nice

[Dewdaahman]

doesn't God say don't take away from or add to my Word..?

[theveryelect24]

I get a shiver whenever pastors tell their congregation not to read the KJ because it is too complicated and they wouldn't get it. That's how Satan's whole system of knowledge and illumination works - the idea that someone smarter than you knows something you don't.

[vudumojo]

@theveryelect24 Exactly, you said..."the idea that someone smarter than you knows something you don't."

It makes the congregation feel that they are not CAPABLE of studying the Bible, because they don't know Greek and Hebrew or just are not skilled enough to understand it or even which translation to read, just like Rome has done. This has infiltrated Christianity a long time ago though. I grew up with the Greek lexicon in the Strong's but now I will only use it as a concordance.

[Skinski7]

I believe this sort of material is very deceptive. The simple message of the Gospel is in all the Bible translations. Repent or perish. Pick up your cross and put to death the flesh and become a living sacrifice being led by the spirit. Christianity is all or nothing and the way is narrow and few will find it. Don't make the error or forever learning and never coming to a knowledge of the truth. It is easy to endlessly get caught up in topics like this.

[vudumojo]

@Skinski7 All Bible versions? All Bible versions are not even translated from the same Bible/manuscripts. You can wish it were so but that does not make it so. These are not only different translations, the sources are not even the same. It would be great IF an updated translation were done, but it hasn't happened.

For now, thank God we even have a Bible at all in the English language. Not BibleS.

[mr44doom]

BRO there are a million different takes on this topic for every scholar thats say strongs or bullinger is wrong there's ten that say there right ..i mean what are you gonna do..i respect ur opinion but ima jus go with my gut...the strongs has alot a truth that the kenites dnt like so i would expected so drummed up cases or overexaggerated mistakes exposed...but i'll will listen to ur advice and give it a shot

[vudumojo]

@mr44doom You're a scholarship -onlyist. That's a mistake. You have the Scripture and the Holy Spirit to reveal it to you.

Men will have many opinions and you will be confused.

[mr44doom]

@vudumojo and by the way after you flip from 1chron 2:55 turn to jeremiah 35 and understand why the kenites are so blessed and own and print all the money..tht why ur dollar has a pryamid on it and an all seeing eye find out who is actually behind all these secret orders..there rich because God blessed not cause they worship satan this is why jondab said they couldnt plant seed and had to be nomads its the curse God gave cain be Yah blessed them for being obediant while is own children were NOT!

[vudumojo]

Additionally, what is really sad is when so-called "King James Onlyists" falsely believe they are sticking to the KJV while using the definitions and Greek lexicon in Strong's which come from entirely different manuscripts than the KJV of the Bible.

That is misled...

[mr44doom]

@vudumojo I READ from cover to cover multiple times with God's wisdom...why and how???? cause i asked for it...solomon himself said Yah gives it to ALL who ask earnestly...i held God to his word not man...aint want to bible thump but your pushed me

[mr44doom]

bro if you think its wrong to look up words in a bible concoordance than your sadly mis lead and the devil jus dnt want you to learn the truth...the bible itself was in hebrew greek and chaldean..so to tell me im wrong for doing tht makes you sound like a kenite..so sad poor mis lead

[vudumojo]

@mr44doom You're wrong. The concordance is fine; it is a good tool and was definitely a must have before the advent of the computer and the "Find" feature and I still think it is a good thing to have on the shelf. However, the definitions and the Greek lexicon in Strong's concordance are from entirely different manuscripts. It's not a simple matter of "going back to the Greek and Hebrew" it's a matter of knowing which manuscripts TO go back to, IF you know actual Greek and Hebrew languages.

[ghostdancer1984]

god did not translate the bible. man did. and i speak both hebrew and english, and i can tell you now, christians purposfully mistranslated alot. shalom.

[imperator332]

Considering the translation is based on the Greek, I fail to see how you can have an imperfect Greek Bible but a perfect English one. The entire process of philology is to advance knowledge. Thanks to modern technology and years of discovery, we have more access to better manuscripts. We're better able to tell interpolations, and revise the texts accordingly.

What you're suggesting is that's bad.

Not only that, but WHICH English Bible?

tl;dr

"traduttore traditore."

[vudumojo]

@ROBINHOODSARROW oh i see your that dumbass who tells people to eat pigs and then you link this comment to force it to the top. Let's fix that

[vudumojo]

@ROBINHOODSARROW King James did nothing. It wasn't originally called the King james Version but the AV authorized version because it was authorized by the protestants and catholics who all had to agree on every pain staking jot and tittle of the translation process and authorize it, not King James.

The King James version was not exclusively translated from the "textus receptus" either but from a soup of manuscripts, none of which included the Alexandrian, Catholic perversions and Greek LXX

[biblia2016]

If you use Linux download Manuscript4u. Learn the meaning of the words by reading all the occurrences of that word with a click, not by dictionaries.

[edwardpf123]

Amen! Running to the Greek and Hebrew is an excuse to avoid what the English is saying, which is what God has given to us to understand.

[vudumojo]

@edwardpf123 Amen friend. It amazes me how many even claim to be "KJV only" but they are not at all while replacing definitions, whole words and whole phrases.

It's pretty straightforward; not complicated in the slightest.

God bless :)

[tramoliter]

@vudumojo there are errors in the KJV as well

[vudumojo]

@tramoliter Alright bro, I hope you don't mind if I do not take your word for it :)

[MagnusShaman]

Many "hebrew/greek" sources could have been touched or corrupted, but those languages are foundation and the very defense against the roman latin pervertions. What i think is that the original language from which the Bible was wrote is the best way to actually understand the meaning fully, example; the greek word- "Ekklesia " for church, not the modern definition of a building, but a group of fellow brothers in the faith.

We should check the sources of greek and hebrew first.

[edwardpf123]

@MagnusShaman -you can't check the 'Greek and Hebrew' first since the Lexicons have been corrupted. Moreover, language meaning is based on context, which means to truely understand both languages you need to be able to have read both enough to understand how the word is used in various context's.

[MagnusShaman]

@edwardpf123 There is a way of testing the greek/ hebrew words, if the meaning of the word applied on the verse "enters in conflict with another" or "does not make sense" or "creates notorious contradictions" should be exposed as corrupt, it is called harmonizing the scriptures, however we should be careful by doing that.

I´m not a specialist on those languages, so i accept only those words which do not enter in conflict with God´s Word.

[edwardpf123]

@MagnusShaman -God's word is in the English and that is what you are comparing the Hebrew and Greek to, when you say 'enter into conflicts with another, or 'does not make sense' You mean doesn't conflict with one another in how it is translated into the English, or 'does not makes sense' in the English.

Now, since you don't know either 'original language' well enough to know how they were used in every context, you can't refer to them to change the English.

[MagnusShaman]

@edwardpf123 I think you might have misunderstand what i have said sir, the greek/ hebrew meaning could be used to understand the etimology of the word better, as the example i gave, Ekklesia",church", today often the church word represents a building and not a body of believers, the greek word fits perfectly on Paul epistles.

I never said to "change", but to help if possible to the comprehention of the etimology of the word.

One aside question, what do you think about the Textus Receptus?

[edwardpf123]

@MagnusShaman -No, etymology tells you very little of how a word should be translated, context and usage does that. 'Church' is easily understood by the context, as the believers, not the building. No need to run to a Gr. word to explain an English one. Use an english dictionary and the context it is being used. 'Church' is first used in Mat.16:18 and again Mat.18:17-the context shows it is not referring to a building.

The TR, espically Beza 1598, is the foundation of the KJB

[MagnusShaman]

@edwardpf123 Obviously the etimology tells very little, but is the task of the research to analyse the context and if it makes sense with other vereses or even if don´t contradict any otther verse. You should not close the door for the etymologic meaning on the original language if possible and well sustained too.

Again, i never said that you need to run to a greek translator to follow the word, i said, greek could help nothing more, nothing less.

Isn´t the KJB based on the textus receptus?

[JimmyCarol100]

Not quite sure whats try'n to be said here. For a more accurate reading of the Holy Scripture, would have to be n the original languages that they were written, Hebrew, Aramaic, Chaldean, Greek & Latin since the English language was only started around the 6th or 7th century AD. But to me the main part is just loving GOD the Father, Jesus His Son & the Holy Spirit w/ all my heart,mind,body & soul,& love my neighbor as myself. Doing this allows GOD to speak to me for HIS Will & Glory. Peace2All

[vudumojo]

@JimmyCarol100 The originals do not exist, but your KJV does exist. To believe you can correct it is foolish.

[JimmyCarol100]

@vudumojo I said original languages, not manuscripts, Dead Sea Scrolls r dated btw 2nd BC & 1st cent AD & written n ancient languages. Did you know over 50,000 english words r derived from Greek & besides that, what did the KJV translators use n 1611? Textus Receptus, LXX,Latin,Greek,Hebrew, Aramaic. I prefer the KJV, yet in Matthew 24:14 Jesus own words said gospel 2 be preached thru-out the world,so that means it has 2 b translated 2 whatever ppl speak n their language. U know I love ya Bro

[vudumojo]

@JimmyCarol100 Jimmy you are not going to the original languages, you are relying on translators.

Choose your translation carefully. The original manuscripts don't even exist to begin with...they have not been preserved but the KJV HAS been preserved, period.

[vudumojo]

@JimmyCarol100 Jimmy, you do not know Greek or Hebrew so you are NOT going BACK to the Greek but to other *translations* into English but you have more FAITH in those translations than you do the KJV translation.

Take your pick but I choose our Bible preserved by God. Even greater problem is, *IF* you learned the languages it wouldn't matter either though, because first it would be your personal translating against all of the translators at the time the KJV was done but originals do not exist.

[JimmyCarol100]

@vudumojo We english speaking ppl all speak some Greek cause it makes up so much of the english language. One more thing, what is ur take on the word Easter used in Acts 12:4 since the word easter was used from the manuscripts to replace the word pascha which is Aramaic for Passover and not Easter which is pagan for the heathen goddess Ishtar. With deepest Brotherly love to you my friend vudumojo, from Bro. in Christ Jesus, Jimmy

[vudumojo]

@JimmyCarol100 I have covered this in great detail in my videos already but let's test your knowledge of Scripture a bit.

The Passover...what comes first the passover or days of unleavened bread?

Now go BACK and re-read Acts 12

3 "...proceeded further to take Peter also. (Then were the days of unleavened bread.)

4 And when he had apprehended him, he put [him] in prison, and delivered [him] to four quaternions of soldiers to keep him; intending after Easter to bring him forth to the people."

[vudumojo]

Continued...

THEREFORE 'easter' is not used as substitute for 'passover'. Easter is REAL; it is the 'holiday' of the pagans and was then.

Here's what we see in Acts 12:

-Passover occurs (evidenced by the fact that "Then were the days of unleavened bread." which comes AFTER Passover DAY)

-7 Days of Unleavened Bread occur

- *THEN* Easter occurs..."intending after Easter to bring him forth to the people."

If you knew GOD'S Holy days you wouldn't be confused about this, would you?

[vudumojo]

@JimmyCarol100 I gave you a 2-part answer but you never acknowledged it ?

Also see my reply to Edward...

Short answer, 'easter' was the correct word in Acts 12. Passover comes first, THEN Days of Unleavened Brad RIGHT?

Well the text plainly says it was already the the days of unleavened bread.

Passover had already came and went, and yet they chose to wait until EASTER, which was a pagan holiday of the Romans.

The word 'easter' wasn't used in place of the word ' passover' in the KJV of Acts

[edwardpf123]

@JimmyCarol100 -The word pascha is a Gr. word and it stood for both Easter and Passover. The word 'passover' was coined by Tyndale and he used 'Easter' as well. The KJB kept the word 'Easter' in Acts.12:4 because the Passover had passed (days of unleavened bread). If you go to Greece today, and ask them their word for Easter, it is pascha.

[vudumojo]

@edwardpf123 You said "because the Passover had passed (days of unleavened bread)".

You're so close is scary.

The reason Passover had already come and gone, evidenced by the fact it was at the time already days of unleavened bread, but yet they waited even LONGER until Easter...is because easter and Passover are 2 separate festivals.

One is of God and the other of the Pagan Romans.

Remember who we're talking about!

Easter is mentioned this one time because it is accurate.

Bottom line.

[JimmyCarol100]

@edwardpf123 I meant pascha(greek) for pecach(hebrew) which is passover, not easter & especially not early christians of 1st century. You honestly think christians or jews observed Ishtar/Easter, this was what GOD's word says to avoid doing as the heathen do. The combining of easter with passover only happened in the 4th/5th century after christianity became the national religion. When Luke wrote in 61AD in Acts 12:4 pascha he meant passover. IMO christians shouldn't celebrate easter. Peace2Ya

[edwardpf123]

@JimmyCarol100 -I think Herod observed a pagan holiday that overlapped with Passover/Unleavened bread. The Feasts clearly state tha Passover was a DAY (the 14th). After the 14th began the second feast, the feast of Unleavened Bread. So, when Acts 12:13 says, (now were the days of unleavened bread) it means that Passover had passed. So, Herod was waiting for Passover to end, he was waiting for his pagan holiday to end before killing Peter. Ishter became later known as 'Easter'

[JimmyCarol100]

@edwardpf123 Hey Bro. I have enjoyed conversing with you & I like ur ability to discuss bible topic's & not get mad or bent outta shape. I like vudumojo to cause he's willing to do the same. Just being honest about something whether I be right or wrong, at least I study daily to try and prove myself. And i'd be lieing if I said I understand it all. But anyhoo, I just went and sub'd/friended ur channel. hope to be discussin GOD's word with you in the future. Peace2Ya, N Christ Jesus, Bro. Jimmy

[edwardpf123]

@JimmyCarol100 -Likewise brother.

[mattandpatti222]

That is why Yahuwah wrote everything up in the stars to read! He says not to anymore because of the Magi/astrology took it and made it against Yahuwah.