I do really like your videos about Bible translations but I’m not a Calvinist.

45:20 -> There is the "Analytical-Literal Translation of the New Testament -Third Edition" by Gary F. Zeolla (uses Robinson-Pierpont textual basis). Also there is the MSB (Majority Standard Bible).

Kongebarn has a good video to see. It's Proof that the textus receptus & traditional text preceeds the critical text.

Hey Pastor Matthew, is there any additional resources on the majority text position? Books? Scholars? Websites? Thanks.

God's breathed words already tell the unsaved how to be saved and born again believers everything we need for life and Holiness, beginning with hearing the Gospel of our salvation for faith, and justification and regeneration upon believing in Jesus Christ, then learning about all else that obtains under Grace. This is found in the New Testament Epistles specifically addressing the Body of Christ under grace not law. Also, the Bible, all Bibles that teach the doctrines found in the NKJV, Niv, Esv, Lsb, Nasb, Csb, modern KJV, 1611 KJV, Nrsv, and other like Bibles, are fine ones as explained by the translators of the 1611 KJV in their letter to the reader, which, for some strange reason, has been removed from modern KJV's. All fine translations also, refute false teachings like those of Roman Catholicism, Calvinism's 9 points-not just 5 called TULIP, Arminianism, etc. and cults like Seventh day Adventism, Jehovah's witnesses, Mormonism, etc. We are truly blessed with a plethora of fine English translations. Praise to God for the treasure trove of Greek New Testament Manuscripts, may the Lord Jesus Christ reveal even more mss., especially papyrus mss.

I agree!!

If you look at his Church's sermon podcast feed (Gospel Fellowship Presbyterian Church) on Spotify or elsewhere, he has uploaded the audio of a few recent videos. Enjoy!

There's an iPhone app called Tubecasts that I use to access these KZfaq vids in audio format. It's pretty convenient. Just copy and paste the url and it'll turn it into a podcast for you.

@@christianchavez4086 Or just listen to the video from the KZfaq app in your car. I can’t imagine what’s the difference. Using the KZfaq app you don’t have to do any copy and paste and you just press play.

@@618society7 The main differences are that streaming audio uses less data and you can lock your screen while it continues to play (without ads) and it’ll pick up where you left off if you pause it. It’s pretty useful.

NKJV is Textus Receptus while the others omit verses from the Bible because they are based on the Critical Text which keeps changing even though the Bible never changes. You may want to check out the MEV or even the earlier Geneva Bible.

I use the NKJV for my personal study and devotion as well. I love that it gives me all the textual variants so it's basically like having a TR with all of the CT and majority text variants. I like the ESV too. But whenever I'm reading it I find that I really miss the italicized supplied words.

The Berean Standard Bible does the same from a CT perspective and, like the NKJV, largely avoids subjectivity but just notes the variant readings.

Put the ESV beside the KJV and compare. How many changes will you find? Ask yourself why? Whats been deleted and what's been added? Why?

WEB translates πορνεία as some sexual sin.....when any sex, out of the covenant has its own term...μοιχεία which most have no difficulty that it is translated as adultery....

I like the World English Bible.

Thank you so much!

I agree JMac!

Using the WEB for the New Testament and MEV for the Old Testament might be even better for getting the true Majority Text in translation.

WEB changes stuff.

I like the WEB.

@@americanswan The WEB change stuff.

@@GodisGracious1031Ministries Go ahead. Tell me what was changed.

​ @americanswan Psalm 145:13, 1 Chronicles 20:3, zechariah 9:17, 1 tim 6:20

No, its bad.

Yes it is, I use it at the moment,the Modern Literal Version (MLV) is also based on the Majority Text

Isn't it, though, largely done by one person? If so, proceed with caution.

WEB is majorly text yes,also Modern Literal Version (MLV) is MT

Be encouraged. There are many.

NKJV is still Textus Receptus, but I believe it shows Majority Text and Critical Text readings in the footnotes. The only translation I know that could be considered majority text is the Eastern Orthodox Bible (New Testament only), which is translated from the Patriarchal Text of 1904 that used the Byzantine Text-Type.

You are correct. I will point out however that the Majority text differences are far far fewer in the NKJV than the Bibles that use the critical text thus making the NKJV closer to the Majority than the others.

WEB and MLV are majority text translations

Read the notes about Psalm 12:6-7 left by the KJV translators in the margin, they contradict you... And don't forget: they were inspired 😂😂😂😂😂

Which Majority Text?

World English Bible is coming out soon with a Leather edition soon.

The Gideons used the NKJV until Harper Collins bought Nelson (and Zondervan) and disallowed it. It's a knock against NKJV now IMHO. To its credit, Crossway jumped in and worked with them to produce a more TR-based ESV. Hopefully a lesson to the owners of the NKJV copyright. I'm not intimately acquainted with the WEB, but one concern it that it's largely the work of a single translator, Michael Paul Johnson. However well meaning and qualified he may be, I'd be cautious about such an approach.

@@sbs8331 It was my understanding that he had a handful of volunteers helping him but I could be wrong. It's cool that he made it Public Domain, but I agree that translations completed by a single individual cannot be taken very seriously. The situation you mentioned with Harper Collins is definitely a bummer. It's pretty uncomfortable having a secular authority over one of our major Bible translations. Just glanced at their site and saw "The Lesbian's Guide to Catholic School" on their homepage. Thankfully, we do still have a wealth of English Translations and the coming centuries should continue a faithful yield should the Lord tarry.

@@christianchavez4086 Yeah, it's like evangelical translations being published by Cambridge, which loudly proclaimed its support of gay pride month.

@@sbs8331 Why would Harper Collins not want the Gideons to distribute the NKJV? That sounds like a poor business decision to me.

May be, but this is, to use a term I hear on Law & Order, facts not in evidence.

@@sbs8331 It's called testing an hypothesis.

@@jamessheffield4173 How does one test something like this? Not being snarky, just genuinely curious. It's been decades since I read Burgon; did he consider this a hypothesis or just a TR defense?

@@sbs8331 Buy two of the same books, put one on shelf, read the other every day, see which one wears out first. Otherwise, your hypothesis. fails Popper's maxim for a theory to be scientific, it must be falsifiable. Burgon wanted obvious errors in the TR to be corrected. Criticizing, anyone not CT Only is not helpful. Pax