if you're referring to the phrase 'heal the broken-hearted' as "missing" from the NASB but in the King James, I've got bad news for you - it's not in the original Greek. It is in the Old Testament passage that Jesus quoted (Isaiah 61:1) so it's understandable that the people who put the Greek New Testament together in the time of James I felt they should include it as it was in some of the manuscripts they were working with. But it's not in the best-attested manuscripts, so the most up-to-date edition of the Greek New Testament doesn;t have it in - which is why all modern translations omit it. So the probability is Jesus didn't include it as part of the reading on that occasion (or Luke deliberately missed it out in his account of Jesus' sermon). Similarly, at the end of v.18 Jesus quotes the phrase 'set the oppressed free' which isn't in Isaiah 61 (it's from Is. 58:6). The New Testament apostles and writers (even Jesus himself) didn't have cut and paste so they were relying on (a) their best memory of the Old Testament passages they quoted, (b) in some cases the Greek translation of those passages (i.e. the Septuagint or LXX, which, being a translation, isn't always word-for word the same as the Hebrew). And then of course there's the issue of the small variations betwen the hundreds of Greek manuscripts we have today from which the compilers of the most up-to-date Greek New Testament have to make educated choices. As you can see, it's all quite complicated!

No problem!

Thanks for the encouragement Josh, much appreciated!

@@monoingles you forgot the new world translation, which the most accurate translation

You Will be Guided if you Know HIM As ABBA First.

I will take your name seriously "Read the bible on a mountain"

Amen

Hi, how do you do?

Check this presentation out. kzfaq.info/get/bejne/sKmJi5lnl9yaYHU.html. God Bless

Choose only The Eternal ONE FATHER'S One Universal "Translation" Showing you HIS Eternal Life Perspective.

Check out the Literal Standard Version (LSV) that just was published a few months ago. It is a mainstream Bible that you can now buy in paperback (ofcourse eventually in hard cover and leather) and its committee said it is a revised YLT that actually claims to be more literal than the YLT itself. I downloaded it on PDF which you can do in their website and I will buy it when imitation leather and hardback versions xome out, but even the paperback right now is beautiful.

Thanks!

If you don't mind me asking, what did you change it from?

NKJV

There is a guy named Kevin Zadai, he talks about the niv version, He is a solid man of God, and He doesn’t have a favorable opinion of it. It is one version that should be discontinued. I’ve heard from other teachers that it should be avoided.

That's exactly how I have it with my King James Bible New King James version the English Standard Version as the literal ones and of course the NIV has the thought for thought and as well the Living Bible for paraphrase.

There is a simple way to know which one you can trust. In John 7:8 the modern bibkes quote Jesus in a lie. Therefore they ha e the anti Christ spirit. Their Jesus says I am not going to the feast. ( not me. Not going). He waits and then goes. Liar! BLASPHEMY!! The Jesus of the KJB says, I am not going up yet to the feast. ( no, not now, not yet). He waits and then goes. No lie! No antichrist spirit. No CONFUSION! Choose who you will serve.

@@andysmith790 NKJV counterfeit, NKJV a deadly translation, NKJV a fraud. Modern translations quote Jesus in a lie. John 7,8. Choose who you will serve.

@@judyswiderski2682 and I really want to know for people who really don't understand it special little kids or what not is there an alternate Bible what about the kjver to start out with

@@judyswiderski2682 I have that one of the first New King James Version ever made in 1982 bonded leather and it explains everything the preface and that Trinity looking symbol it explains how that is one with God yet it's three different persons it's made by Thomas Nelson which also has King James Bible and I follow along I don't read the little side notes where it says this manuscript says this although I will say that that is very cool because you can compare and contrast what each manuscript says but I read the holy book of God in the New King James Version tells the same thing that the King James version does and by the way many people get saved by the New King James Version Bible you look at the fruit that something bears.

I just acquired an NASB not that long ago, b=though my preferred translation is the HCSB

I've seen the ISV on other diagrams but with a note that it was hard to place. The prose is quite literal, but because they wanted to represent the Hebrew poetry as English poetry, those sections can be much more dynamic and perhaps even a paraphrase. I haven't read it much, but it's an interesting concept despite the fact that Hebrew and English poetry follow very different dynamics.

Interesting. Why is it your favorite, if I may ask?

@@Untitled-ee6ks it is the most accurate, while also being easily understood. It also restores God’s name to all the places it originally appeared in the manuscripts. All over 7,000 of them.

I don't think you should switch until you have had a read of it to see if you get on with it. The NASB is a bit dry for me, that is why I read the ESV because I can get on with it!

KJV rocks! NKJV also rocks. ESV rocks. I adore all 3. They perfectly complement each other. Just saying. :)

Wow! You have more Bibles than me! 😮😁

And the only one without a copyright

@@melmel3703 not true. Only one not to have a copyright in the USA. It’s copyright is in the UK actually. So that country would have to get permission to make a KJV Bible. I love the KJV too. Preach from it often. Definitely not KJV only lol. No one should think that’s the o my Bible to read. That’s like saying “if you can’t read English then you’re hell bound”.

@@chris2fur401 ok goodbye

Exactly!!!! The only one I need .

@@melmel3703 lol. Until someone has spent time getting fluid in Greek and Hebrew and can actually tell themselves which is the most accurate, I don’t wanna hear their arguments. It took me 3 years and of seminary just to get where I felt comfortable speaking Greek. That being said, other than the book of revelations, KJV is pretty accurate. Minus the “unicorns” and things like that. NKJV is EXTREMELY accurate. I love both of those because I’m a textus receptus guy.

So, paying a lot of money make one translation better than another. right.

@@msmarxmenThis is the first time that I've purchased an NASB translation. I love it! I've gone from seldom reading the Bible to reading it hours a day! And my faith in Christ is growing! I agree with a Bible Reviewer that it reads a little "woody" because of it's formal language being close to the KJV. But I'm okay with that because I like the KJV. Whatever translation that gets you reading the Word, that's the one best for you!! I didn't use wise discretion in sharing about my Schuyler Quentil in the comments under this video. I am just so excited about the Bible that I like to share it with people! But I know many people can't afford it. I'm sorry that I offended you sir. It wasn't my intention. Take Care And God Bless You. 💜

It's great to read a testimony about your Bible reading! There needs to be more people like you out there getting passionate about reading their Bible. You will inspire others, keep it up!

🙌

ESV study bible is also for reformed people, if you dont buy into Calvinism dont buy study bibles from ESV. I say dont buy any study bible.

Never heard of it but I can look into it.

@@monoingles Thank you. The Legacy Standard Bible is supposed to be based on the 1995 New American Standard Bible.

Also the NASB is being revised, so something to look forward to!

Me too

just dont make the KJV the standard to compare others too, you must compare them to the manuscripts.

If only there were a King James which used the Septuagint instead of the Masoretic OT... with both updated to modern English.

I don’t believe that the KJV is the inspired word of God. The KJV Is not the inspired preserved word of God. It is rather the most accurate translation of the Bible version which was translated from the inspired preserved word of God, as it is translated *OUT OF THE ORIGINAL TONGUE* , hence it is oftentimes called as *THE AUTHORIZED VERSION* . The proof that we still have the inspired word of God is not because of the KJV Bible, but because of the countless number of printed Bibles that is being published all over the world. As God “hath made of one blood all nations of men for to dwell on all the face of the earth, and hath determined the times before appointed, and the bounds of their habitation”(Acts 17:26); hence we have the Bible translated into almost all languages in the world. And that’s the best proof that God has preserved his words (not because of the one single version of the Bible). We do not have the original manuscripts from which our Bible was translated. All that we have are copies of the original. Do you see why God chose not to preserve for us the original manuscripts of his words, but only gave us the copies of the original? It is because if the original is still available, men with their evil intent will destroy it and corrupt it. If that happens, then what’s the point of still preserving or keeping the original (if men can still destroy and corrupt it)? But if only copies are available, then by diligently comparing side by side the text of the manuscripts, scholars can be able to know the exact words, and so can convey the exact message that God wants us to know from his words.

@@paeng46 Very well said :-) ♥

What about the Lexham English Bible?

@@DragonKingGaav I believe the Lexham English Bible is a relatively new modern English transliteration of the GREEK translation (Septuagint). Since in Jesus' time on earth, many spoke Greek under Roman rule, therefore the Bible at that time (the Hebrew OT) consequently had to be translated to Greek for some people because that was common language at that time, very much like English translations today. I prefer reading an English translation that is directly closest to the original source, which is the Masoretic Hebrew OT, because translating from Hebrew to Greek and then that same Greek to English allows for possibilities of minute things being lost in translation. That being said, there's no doubt at all that God uses that Bible as well to get people saved.

@@andysmith790 Thanks!

@@DragonKingGaav 🙂

Yes, this is a good resource!

All translations are good (as long as it's easy to understand), but some are just a little better than others. If there is a particular scripture that interests me I use biblehub.com to compare many translations at once, and see why if there are large discrepancies. Another issue in some bibles like the King James Bible is that it promotes the trinity over the original writings and intended thoughts of the writers, and that is because the churches have deviated from Gods word since the 3rd and 4th centuries and substitute it for pagan ideals and false traditions that have permeated into Christianity, such as Christmas, Easter, The Cross and The Trinity Which is widely and independently documented. The Churches have become the new unfaithful Israel of old in that everything that the church teaches has become false. It even goes to blatantly say to its followers, they are not pagan, they are Christian teachings and celebrations, when in fact they are fully pagan and not from gods word. For example, the substitution of the name Jehovah to Lord, God, or any other title is there to purposely promote the Trinity and not the truth of Gods word and only serves the devil who is misleading the entire world. The link below is a short video of this point. www.jw.org/en/library/videos/#en/mediaitems/VODBibleTeachings/docid-502014331_1_VIDEO The New World Translation of the bible has set out to make the most accurate translation as I will link several short videos you can watch to prove this at the very bottom. Another way it has tried to do this is by adding the name Jehovah back to its original laces which appears in the manuscripts provided. By doing this it Solidifies the proof that Jesus is not God, and that the only true God Jehovah is not part of a trinity. Another such instance is on the subject of the Cross or Crucifix. The Greek word generally translated “cross” is stau·rosʹ. It basically means “an upright pale or stake.” The Companion Bible points out: “[Stau·rosʹ] never means two pieces of timber placed across one another at any angle . . . There is nothing in the Greek of the [New Testament] even to imply two pieces of timber.” In several texts, Bible writers use another word for the instrument of Jesus’ death. It is the Greek word xyʹlon. (Acts 5:30; 10:39; 13:29; Galatians 3:13; 1 Peter 2:24). This word simply means “timber” or “a stick, club, or tree.” The word cross was introduced to English in the tenth century as the term for the instrument of the torturous execution of Christ (gr. stauros', xy'lon), gradually replacing rood, ultimately from Latin crux, via Old Irish cros. Originally, both "rood" and "crux" referred simply to any "pole," the later shape associated with the term being based in church tradition, rather than etymology. I have also listed some independent sources which will verify this: The Washington Post: www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/five-myths-about-the-cross/2017/04/14/dae63c1a-1fa8-11e7-be2a-3a1fb24d4671_story.html Encyclopaedia Britannica.com: www.britannica.com/topic/cross-religious-symbol You will see that the same crosses used in Egyptian worship is used by many false Christians churches today. ABC NEWS: abcnews.go.com/GMA/jesus-christ-died-cross-scholar/story?id=11066130 Symbol Dictionary.com: symboldictionary.net/?p=2044 Wikipedia: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ CrossEncyclopaedia.com: www.encyclopedia.com/philosophy-and-religion/christianity/christianity-general/cross You may say there is also plenty of proof that the Cross is not similar or does not denote the same pagan god's but the true god in the bible? But if that is the case and Jesus was not Crucified, then why use this symbol at all. Why not use the symbol of an upright pole than the Cross? To ignore this fact is to ignore the accuracies of the scriptures. Romans 3:13 is accurately translated here by New World translation and the New International Version as - "Christ redeemed us from the curse of the law by becoming a curse for us, for it is written: "Cursed is everyone who is hung on a pole." In fact of the over 20 translations of Romans 3:13, only the New Living Translation translates it with the word cross, the others accurately use word pole or tree.... biblehub.com/galatians/3-13.htm Acts 5:30 also defines the way Jesus died was on a tree. Of the above 29 translations, only 6 pro Trinity bibles use the word cross. biblehub.com/acts/5-30.htm I commend these bible translations for accurately using the original text and not the traditional pagan understanding. However, in Ephesians 2:16 New World Translation (NWT) translates this scripture using the words "torture stake", but the same other 29 bibles above all translate this with the word "cross" or "crucifix". And only the Jubilee Bible 2000 translates it with the added Greek word stake, when it translates it this way: "and to reconcile both with God by the cross {Gr. stauros - stake} in one body, having slain the enmity thereby;". biblehub.com/ephesians/2-16.htm And again the same 29 translations above all translate 1Corrinthians 1:18 with the words "Cross" or crucifix", and again the Jubilee Bible 2000 puts in (Stake) as per Ephesians 2:16 above., but the NWT is the only one that translates it using the words torture stake and not mention the cross or crucifix in any of its translations.... In fact there are many scriptures in the above 29 translations that inaccurately include the words cross or crucifix to promote a false doctrine and idol of pagan gods perpetuated by the Church. Unfortunately it doesn't make the it right, and unfortunately many who honest hearted persons have come to believe this lie as the truth when it is not and are being mislead. As promised, here are some short videos that you or any one else will see to what extent the Jehovah's Witnesses go through to accurately translate the bible. www.jw.org/en/library/videos/#en/mediaitems/VODBibleTranslations/docid-502014271_1_VIDEO The ancient manuscripts: www.jw.org/en/library/videos/#en/mediaitems/VODBibleTranslations/docid-502018464_1_VIDEO The love in truthful translations: www.jw.org/en/library/videos/#en/mediaitems/VODBibleTranslations/docid-502016501_1_VIDEO Previous pioneers of bible translators: www.jw.org/en/library/videos/#en/mediaitems/VODBibleTranslations/docid-502017151_1_VIDEO Correcting latin translations: www.jw.org/en/library/videos/#en/mediaitems/VODBibleTranslations/docid-502017151_1_VIDEO

@@richardchileshe9910 In many places in the Gospel of John Jesus stated He is God. In John 8:58 "Before Abraham, I am." Exidus 4:14. The corrupt Jews wanted to stone Him be sure He called God His Father s zdx ying I and the Father are one, making himself to be God. John 10:33. For the Fatger lover you because you have lo ed me, and believe that I came out from God. John 16:27. Also, He knew His Father as the Father knew Him. John 10:15. Only Gid can know as God knows. He could forgive sins Mark 2:10-12. Destroy this theme [His body] and in three days I will raise it up. John 2 :18-22. I am the Alpha and Omega the beginning and the ending, saith the Lord, which is and which was and which is to come, the Almighty. Revelation 2:8. The KJB teaches the Godhead. Some say it is the trunity, but not all. See: Trinity v Godhesd. Then, Godhead v "Trinity" Bryan Denlinger. Blessings.

@@judyswiderski2682 Hi Judy. I hope your well. The scriptures you have quoted are like the many quoted by the Church to prove the Trinity or that Jesus is God or Part of God. However no where in the Scriptures does Jesus say he is God. In fact every scripture used by Christendom to prove the above are scriptures taken out of context. So lets take a look at the first scripture you used to confirm that Jesus is God. John 8:58 reads from the King James Bible "Jesus said unto them, Verily, verily, I say unto you, Before Abraham was, I am.". Does this prove that Jesus is God? No. It simply states that we was alive before Abraham was born. The bible tells us that Jesus had a pre-human existence in heaven, and in fact the rendering of this scripture should really read the way most other bibles translate it : "Jesus said to them, "Truly, truly, I say to you, before Abraham was born, I am." - New American Standard Bible. So which is correct? Please compare the read and compare these scriptures in your own bible for comparison. Lets compare other scriptures in the bible to gain context and see what thoughts are in harmony with the rest of the bible. The apostle Paul under inspiration from the Holy Spirit wrote in Colossians 1:15 "He is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn over all creation." - New King James Version. Does it not clearly state that "He" being Jesus is the first born over all creation? Note what the Revelation which God gives to Jesus, and Jesus gives to the Angel says concerning Jesus in Revelation 3:14 “And to the angel of the church of the Laodiceans write, ‘These things says the Amen, the Faithful and True Witness, the Beginning of the creation of God:” - New King James Version. Did you also note that Jesus and God Jehovah are separate because God gives the revelation to Jesus. Prior to this Jesus was unaware what revelations God was going to give him (Please Revelation 1:1). But the main point here is like that of Colossians 1:15 above, Revelation 3:14 also clearly states and confirms that Jesus is God’s first creation. Proverbs 8:22 & 23 states this about Jesus: ““The LORD formed me from the beginning, before he created anything else. I was appointed in ages past, at the very first, before the earth began.” - New Living Translation. The Good News Translation reads it this way: “The LORD created me first of all, the first of his works, long ago. I was made in the very beginning, at the first, before the world began.”. And the Aramaic Bible in Plain English reads: “Lord Jehovah created me at the beginning of his creation and from before all of his works.” And before the world he was possessed by me, and from the beginning, before he would establish the Earth.”. Please open your bibles and also read verses 24 to 29 to gain insight in what Jesus saw in the creation process. Then verse 30 continues, “I was the architect at his side. I was his constant delight, rejoicing always in his presence.” - New Living Translation. Or as the Contemporary English Version translates it, “I was right beside the LORD, helping him plan and build. I made him happy each day, and I was happy at his side.”. Yes Jesus found delight being with God, not as God. Which is why God said the following about Jesus in John 5:17 “But even as he spoke, a bright cloud overshadowed them, and a voice from the cloud said, “This is my dearly loved Son, who brings me great joy. Listen to him.” - New Living Translation. Please also read verse 31 to 36 to confirm that this is talking about Jesus. At the very outset I highlighted Colossians 1:15 which reads “The Son is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn over all creation. - New International Version. In verse 16 it continues and tells us: “'For by Him all things were created, both in the heavens and on earth, visible and invisible, whether thrones or dominions or rulers or authorities-- all things have been created through Him and for Him." - New American Standard Bible. Like these cross reference scriptures John 1:10, 1 Corinthians 8:6, Hebrews 1:2, 1 John 5:1, Colossians 1:16 tells us that All things were created for him and through him. How is this possible if he is not God? It's like when Jesus was on earth, who cured the sick and raised the dead? Jesus knew that it was not him, but that his power comes from God. In the same way, all things were created by Jesus, but it is God's power that makes it possible for him to do so. This is why Jesus is the only one that can be called God's only begotten son. Because as God's first creation, Jesus was made directly by God. Then Jehovah God used Jesus to create everything else. Which is why God say's in Hebrews 1:5 "For to which of the angels did He ever say: “You are My Son, Today I have begotten You”? And again: “I will be to Him a Father, And He shall be to Me a Son”?" - New King James Version. Please read these cross references to the scriptures John 1:10, 1 Corinthians 8:6, Hebrews 1:2, 1 John 5:1. Genesis 1:26 states "Then God said, “Let Us make man in Our image, according to Our likeness;...." He was not talking to himself or another part of himself, no, he was talking to Jesus who as described in Proverbs 8:22 to 36 was his fist born and master worker. In John 1:1 it reads, "In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God." - New King James Version. Let’s break this scripture down. It says that "In the beginning the Word was with God. The "word" being Jesus who is to act as God's spokesman cannot be one and the same as God. Why? Because it says that "In the beginning the word was with God". It cannot be talking about the beginning of God, since God has no beginning. Like humans, Jesus was created as stated above in Colossians 1:15 in God's image. First born or first creation from God. God prophesied in Psalms 89:27 ""Indeed, I myself made him the firstborn, the highest of the kings of the earth. I will show my gracious love toward him forever, since my covenant is securely established with him. I will establish his dynasty forever, and his throne as long as heaven endures." - International Standard Version. Col. 1:15, 16, reads “He [Jesus Christ] is the image of the invisible God, the first-born of all creation; for in him all things were created, in heaven and on earth.” In what sense is Jesus Christ “the first-born of all creation”? Trinitarians say that “first-born” here means prime, most excellent, most distinguished; thus Christ would be understood to be, not part of creation, but the most distinguished in relation to those who were created. If that is so, and if the Trinity doctrine is true, why are the Father and the holy spirit not also said to be the firstborn of all creation? But why does the Bible apply this expression only to the Son. According to the customary meaning of “firstborn,” it indicates that Jesus is the eldest in Jehovah’s family of sons, or as Revelation 3:14 and Proverbs 8:22 & 23 state he is God's first creation. Before Colossians 1:15, the expression “the firstborn of” occurs upwards of 30 times in the Bible, and in each instance that it is applied to living creatures the same meaning applies-the firstborn is part of the group. “The firstborn of Israel” is one of the sons of Israel; “the firstborn of Pharaoh” is one of Pharaoh’s family; “the firstborn of beast” are themselves animals. What, then, causes some to ascribe a different meaning to it at Colossians 1:15? Is it Bible usage or is it a belief to which they already hold and for which they seek proof? These scriptures above should answer how Jesus came to say that before Abraham was, I am. It is because as God's first creation, he existed first. Continued....

@@judyswiderski2682 As for john 10:33 it reads "The Jews answered Him, saying, “For a good work we do not stone You, but for blasphemy, and because You, being a Man, make Yourself God.” - New King James Version . This does not mean that Jesus is God. the following verses Jesus himself confirms that he is not God but rather he makes a clear distiction that he is the son of God. Verses 34 to 36 reads "Jesus answered them, “Is it not written in your law, ‘I said, “You are gods” ’? If He called them gods, to whom the word of God came (and the Scripture cannot be broken), do you say of Him whom the Father sanctified and sent into the world, ‘You are blaspheming,’ because I said, ‘I am the Son of God’? - New King James Version. Another translation reads: “They answered, "We are not stoning you because of any good thing you did. We are stoning you because you did a terrible thing. You are just a man, and here you are claiming to be God!". So why do you accuse me of a terrible sin for saying that I am the Son of God? After all, it is the Father who prepared me for this work. He is also the one who sent me into the world." - Contemporary English Version. Never did Jesus ever claim he was God. In fact Jesus clarified he was not God, but as God's first creation he was God's son. John 20:17 reads “Jesus said to her, “Do not cling to Me, for I have not yet ascended to My Father; but go to My brethren and say to them, ‘I am ascending to My Father and your Father, and to My God and your God” - New King James Version. Note what the Catholic Encyclopedia states ""The doctrine of the Trinity is not taught in the Old Testament" (New Catholic Encyclopedia, 1967, Vol. XIV, p. 306). In fact also no where in the New Testament is the teaching of the trinity taught as well". Consider the following from the same source: "The Old Testament clearly does not envisage God’s spirit as a person…God’s spirit is simply God’s power. If it is sometimes represented as being distinct from God, it is because the breath of Yahweh acts exteriorly…The majority of New Testament texts reveal God’s spirit as something, not someone; this is especially seen in the parallelism between the spirit and the power of God" (New Catholic Encyclopedia, 1967, Vol. 13, pp. 574, 575). Confirming this W.E. Addis and Thomas Arnold, A Catholic Dictionary writes: "On the whole the New Testament, like the Old, speaks of the spirit as a divine energy or power" (W.E. Addis and Thomas Arnold, A Catholic Dictionary, 1960, p. 810). Jesus also corrected a man as said the following in mark 10:18 "So Jesus said to him, “Why do you call Me good? No one is good but One, that is, God." - New King James Version . Jesus himself stated that he is not God. In fact many times he said he was not God. John 20:17 reads “Jesus said to her, “Do not cling to Me, for I have not yet ascended to My Father; but go to My brethren and say to them, ‘I am ascending to My Father and your Father, and to My God and your God” New King James Version. before coming to the earth and on his return to heaven the apostle confirmed the following about Jesus. Please also note, Philippians 2:6 states “Who, being in very nature God, did not consider equality with God something to be used to his own advantage;” - New International Version. This is confirmed by Jesus himself many times, but note what he says towards the end of his life on Earth, at John 14:28 : “You have heard Me say to you, ‘I am going away and coming back to you.’ If you loved Me, you would rejoice because I said, ‘I am going to the Father,’ for My Father is greater than I”. - New King James Version. The apostles also confirms this for us. What is interesting is that everything written about Jesus after John was completed after his return to heaven. So 1Corinthians 11:3 also confirms that Jesus was not God in heaven also since it reads: “But I want you to know that the head of every man is Christ, the head of woman is man, and the head of Christ is God” New King James Version. So to believe that Jesus is God is to disregard the bible as a whole. It is not surprising then that Cardinal Hosius is quoted as having said: “We believe the doctrine of a triune God, because we have received it by tradition, though not mentioned at all in Scripture.” (Conf. Cathol. Fidei, Chap. XXVI). Another persons are just as frank about declaring the trinity to be of pagan origin is Arthur Weigall, in his book The Paganism in Our Christianity, states: “Jesus Christ never mentioned such a phenomenon, and nowhere in the New Testament does the word ‘Trinity’ appear.” So like Christmas, Easter, Hell and the Cross, the Trinity or the notion that Jesus is God is not biblical. Keen students of the bible can also confirm the following: "The New Testament writers...give us no formal or formulated doctrine of the Trinity, no explicit teaching that in one God there are three equal divine persons.... Nowhere do we find any Trinitarian doctrine of three distinct subjects of divine life and activity in the same Godhead" (Fortman, The Triune God, pp. xv, xvi, 16). "Neither the word Trinity nor the explicit doctrine appears in the New Testament" (The New Encyclopedia Britannica, 1985, Vol. 11, p. 928). "Apparently Paul did not call Jesus God" (Sydney Cave, D.D., Doctrine of the Person of Christ, p. 48). "There is no break between the Old Testament and the New. The monotheistic tradition is continued. Jesus was a Jew, trained by Jewish parents in the Old Testament scriptures. His teaching was Jewish to the core; a new gospel indeed but not a new theology…And he accepted as his own belief the great text of Jewish monotheism: Hear, O Israel, the Lord our God is one God" (L.L. Paine, A Critical History of the Evolution of Trinitarianism, Houghton Mifflin and Co., 1900, p. 4). "Neither the word Trinity nor the explicit doctrine appears in the New Testament" (The New Encyclopedia Britannica, 1985, Vol. 11, p. 928). "Fourth-century Trinitarianism did not reflect accurately early Christian teaching regarding the nature of God; it was, on the contrary a deviation from this teaching" (The Encyclopedia Americana, p. 1956, p. 2941). "Paul habitually differentiates Christ from God" (C.J. Cadoux, A Pilgrim’s Further Progress, pp. 40, 42). "Paul never equates Jesus with God" (W.R. Matthews, The Problem of Christ in the 20th Century, Maurice Lectures, 1949, p. 22). "Paul never gives to Christ the name or description of ‘God’" (Dictionary of the Apostolic Church, Vol. 1, p. 194). "When the New Testament writers speak of Jesus Christ, they do not speak of Him nor do they think of Him as God" (J.M. Creed, The Divinity of Jesus Christ, pp. 122-123). If you are really interested in knowing the truth about God, Jesus, and many other things about God I recommend you click on the following link to find out more on the subject: God the Creator: www.jw.org/en/bible-teachings/online-lessons/basic-bible-teachings/unit-1/who-is-god-the-creator/#56 Who is Jesus: www.jw.org/en/bible-teachings/online-lessons/basic-bible-teachings/unit-2/who-is-jesus/#25 I hope you will be able to check all the scriptures cited from your own bible and confirm the information above for yourself.

Nice! the Hebrew tetregramaton for the name of God' that the paganized church' from long ago had removed from its KJV of 1611 writ' near 7000 times yet which is still' is found six plus times in their trusted "translated or "version" the most strategic areas- Ex 6:3; Ps 83:18; Is 12:2; 26:4; out side of the example of Christ' all but "one" follow suit with "catholic" cult' has duped many into believing a lie as actuality "blasphemy" Jesus disciples believed the "truth" that Jesus taught. -Acts --5:28---31; is not sperious' Gods word the Bible does not contradict itself' God is never referred to as in the plural sense' allways singular' we get the sense of the unity in the words of Jesus last recorded prayer to his God before he was murdered for teaching the 'truth' John 17:1-26; Confirm' John --20:17--; also' they dont teach accurate mean- ings of hallelu-Jah.. the name Jesus' and Elijah' (Prophet of GOD long be- fore ther was a Christian.. God is how many? Deuteronomy 6:4; see Gods words delivered by an angel' a clear directive -Isaiah 43:7,10-13; Jesus tells why' and who' their daddy really is -John 8:19,40-47 truth does matter -Matthew 7:13-23; (Jesus)

you have the issue of how words develop and change both in the original language, and then in the changing and developing language which we use. There is the the issue that words are nuanced in the the original and in the contemporary language, and nuancing is also dynamic. For me, the Jesus Seminar addressed this issue head on, and transformed how I see the Bible. How, when and why was each biblical book written and how many contributors wrote it? I’m just a scientist, not a linguist.. I feel the David Suchet, by reading the Bible in balanced spoken English, puts the icing on the cake of linguistics.

How does the CSB compare in accuracy to the NIV in your opinion?

@@konstantinallinforchrist9867 the CSB is more accurate than the NIV to the original manuscripts used by the translators. While the NIV is a very accurate translation, it does sacrifice accuracy for readability in some areas. The NIV is a dynamic equivalence/thought for thought(could argue for optimal equivalence) while the CSB is what’s called an optimal equivalence.

@@warrenrhinerson6373 Thank you, God bless

@@konstantinallinforchrist9867 you’re welcome. Here’s a good one if you want to try it out CSB Large Print Personal Size Reference Bible, Charcoal LeatherTouch smile.amazon.com/dp/1433647710/ref=cm_sw_r_cp_api_glt_fabc_WJ048H01FJRH3JAVS785

You too! 🙏🙌

You're right! I was going for what was more readily available, but it is good to make people aware that there are other versions out there, thanks!

Surely there are septuagint translations in modern english?

@@lisenpedersen ya, I found an orthodox bible that is good and ebible.org/eng-Brenton/

Thanks for the comment and I like the analogy!

NKJV and NASB are very accurate.

Dean Jones Me too

so you were a Pentecostal(NIV) and now you are a Calvinist(ESV) Am I correct?

@Jeff Backus so why do you think there are so many Christian Denominations today! I was raised SB but now Calvinist own it, very sad. kzfaq.info/get/bejne/p7J9icJnvru7o58.html

Dean Jones corrupted versions Vatican approved. SMH

@@hudsontd7778 ESV is not slanted toward Calvinism in any way as so many parrot. If it was, I would not read it as Calvinism is a damnable doctrine of demons.

All translations are good (as long as it's easy to understand), but some are just a little better than others. If there is a particular scripture that interests me I use biblehub.com to compare many translations at once, and see why if there are large discrepancies. Another issue in some bibles like the King James Bible is that it promotes the trinity over the original writings and intended thoughts of the writers, and that is because the churches have deviated from Gods word since the 3rd and 4th centuries and substitute it for pagan ideals and false traditions that have permeated into Christianity, such as Christmas, Easter, The Cross and The Trinity Which is widely and independently documented. The Churches have become the new unfaithful Israel of old in that everything that the church teaches has become false. It even goes to blatantly say to its followers, they are not pagan, they are Christian teachings and celebrations, when in fact they are fully pagan and not from gods word. For example, the substitution of the name Jehovah to Lord, God, or any other title is there to purposely promote the Trinity and not the truth of Gods word and only serves the devil who is misleading the entire world. The link below is a short video of this point. www.jw.org/en/library/videos/#en/mediaitems/VODBibleTeachings/docid-502014331_1_VIDEO The New World Translation of the bible has set out to make the most accurate translation as I will link several short videos you can watch to prove this at the very bottom. Another way it has tried to do this is by adding the name Jehovah back to its original laces which appears in the manuscripts provided. By doing this it Solidifies the proof that Jesus is not God, and that the only true God Jehovah is not part of a trinity. Another such instance is on the subject of the Cross or Crucifix. The Greek word generally translated “cross” is stau·rosʹ. It basically means “an upright pale or stake.” The Companion Bible points out: “[Stau·rosʹ] never means two pieces of timber placed across one another at any angle . . . There is nothing in the Greek of the [New Testament] even to imply two pieces of timber.” In several texts, Bible writers use another word for the instrument of Jesus’ death. It is the Greek word xyʹlon. (Acts 5:30; 10:39; 13:29; Galatians 3:13; 1 Peter 2:24). This word simply means “timber” or “a stick, club, or tree.” The word cross was introduced to English in the tenth century as the term for the instrument of the torturous execution of Christ (gr. stauros', xy'lon), gradually replacing rood, ultimately from Latin crux, via Old Irish cros. Originally, both "rood" and "crux" referred simply to any "pole," the later shape associated with the term being based in church tradition, rather than etymology. I have also listed some independent sources which will verify this: The Washington Post: www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/five-myths-about-the-cross/2017/04/14/dae63c1a-1fa8-11e7-be2a-3a1fb24d4671_story.html Encyclopaedia Britannica.com: www.britannica.com/topic/cross-religious-symbol You will see that the same crosses used in Egyptian worship is used by many false Christians churches today. ABC NEWS: abcnews.go.com/GMA/jesus-christ-died-cross-scholar/story?id=11066130 Symbol Dictionary.com: symboldictionary.net/?p=2044 Wikipedia: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ CrossEncyclopaedia.com: www.encyclopedia.com/philosophy-and-religion/christianity/christianity-general/cross You may say there is also plenty of proof that the Cross is not similar or does not denote the same pagan god's but the true god in the bible? But if that is the case and Jesus was not Crucified, then why use this symbol at all. Why not use the symbol of an upright pole than the Cross? To ignore this fact is to ignore the accuracies of the scriptures. Romans 3:13 is accurately translated here by New World translation and the New International Version as - "Christ redeemed us from the curse of the law by becoming a curse for us, for it is written: "Cursed is everyone who is hung on a pole." In fact of the over 20 translations of Romans 3:13, only the New Living Translation translates it with the word cross, the others accurately use word pole or tree.... biblehub.com/galatians/3-13.htm Acts 5:30 also defines the way Jesus died was on a tree. Of the above 29 translations, only 6 pro Trinity bibles use the word cross. biblehub.com/acts/5-30.htm I commend these bible translations for accurately using the original text and not the traditional pagan understanding. However, in Ephesians 2:16 New World Translation (NWT) translates this scripture using the words "torture stake", but the same other 29 bibles above all translate this with the word "cross" or "crucifix". And only the Jubilee Bible 2000 translates it with the added Greek word stake, when it translates it this way: "and to reconcile both with God by the cross {Gr. stauros - stake} in one body, having slain the enmity thereby;". biblehub.com/ephesians/2-16.htm And again the same 29 translations above all translate 1Corrinthians 1:18 with the words "Cross" or crucifix", and again the Jubilee Bible 2000 puts in (Stake) as per Ephesians 2:16 above., but the NWT is the only one that translates it using the words torture stake and not mention the cross or crucifix in any of its translations.... In fact there are many scriptures in the above 29 translations that inaccurately include the words cross or crucifix to promote a false doctrine and idol of pagan gods perpetuated by the Church. Unfortunately it doesn't make the it right, and unfortunately many who honest hearted persons have come to believe this lie as the truth when it is not and are being mislead. As promised, here are some short videos that you or any one else will see to what extent the Jehovah's Witnesses go through to accurately translate the bible. www.jw.org/en/library/videos/#en/mediaitems/VODBibleTranslations/docid-502014271_1_VIDEO The ancient manuscripts: www.jw.org/en/library/videos/#en/mediaitems/VODBibleTranslations/docid-502018464_1_VIDEO The love in truthful translations: www.jw.org/en/library/videos/#en/mediaitems/VODBibleTranslations/docid-502016501_1_VIDEO Previous pioneers of bible translators: www.jw.org/en/library/videos/#en/mediaitems/VODBibleTranslations/docid-502017151_1_VIDEO Correcting latin translations: www.jw.org/en/library/videos/#en/mediaitems/VODBibleTranslations/docid-502017151_1_VIDEO

While searching for the most accurate translation of the bible & scrolling down to comments I bumped into yours & hopefully you see this as it's been a year since you've posted this. Question how is jesus not God? If this is the case where I have trouble understanding the trinity myself does this mean Islam is the real truth? Was jesus christ just a mediator?

Done some research and found the answer myself. Some verses appear on some manuscripts but not others.

One of the translators of the NASB has revoked his association with the translation due to how terrible it is. The NIV might even be worse.

2nd only to the KJV! I've heard that people find it difficult to read. That's because it reads like the KJV! I love my NASB, but I have other Bibles for reference. I like the NKJV and the Amplified.

@@gailgunderson5163 KJV is poetic

@@gailgunderson5163 I agree. The KJB is the best. I do have trouble honoring bibles that quote Jesus in a lie! Most moder bibles quote Jesus telling his brothers in John 7:8, I am not going to the feast for my time has not yet come. (Is he going to break the law of Moses?) He waits and then goes. Liar! Blasphemy. Jesus actually says, I am not going up yet to the feast for my time has not yet come. Not yet, he said, not now. He waits and then goes. No lie. No problem. Consider this: The bible has been changed. Did God say? Come on, really? God said He preserved His word. Psalm 12:6-7. Most modern bibles do not. In other words they are not admitting that God has a standard, His inspired word. His word is quick (alive) and quickens (gives life). His word is eternal. Most of the modern bibles have at least one out and out lie. NKJB lies in Exodus 6:3. They began to call on the name of the Lord in Genesis 4:26. Others quote Jesus telling his brothers, i am not going to the feast. John 7:8. (Is he saying he is going to break the law of Moses?) He waits and then goes. Liar! BLASPHEMY . Jesus simply said, not going now, not yet. He waits and then goes. No problem, no lie. And blatantly they mock Jesus and unashamedly, constantly, with each change ask, Did God say? Did God say Mark 11:26? Absolutely. It is an essential part of our walk with God. A verse that makes us tremble was added????? Did God say? Acts 15:34? It shows God's divine providence. Silas was there when Paul needed him for a journey. Obviously Silas remained there. BRAZENLY, they change or remove a word that gives the believers true power! Matthew 12:31 and Mark 9:29! Some spiritual warfare needs prayer and fasting! Did God say eleven (11) times in the New Testament the word damnation, eternal burning? Yes. But not in theirs! Did God say? Did God give three witnesses to that truth? Mark 9:44, 46, 48. They however only have v48. The other two they ask, Did God say? This is important because we need to know the truth and those who preach Annialism, we cease to exist, are easily proven wrong with these verses. Jesus is God and Jesus is Man. Hebrews supports this with four verses, 3:3, 7:24, 8:3 and 10:12: "But this man, after he had offered one sacrifice for sin for ever, sat down at rhe right hand of God; v10:12. They do not use the clarifying words 'this man' at all. Again, Did God say? Every change they make is an insult to God and His word. God said He would curse those who add to or take from His word. Revelation 22:18-19. In the Old Testament those who honored a false prophet received the reward of that prophet. So the Alexandrian translators, the bible societies the publishers, the promoters, sellers and those who teach from them (showing those ear tickling bibles as God's word) or honor them will be held responsible. If done ignorantly, repent. God will not be mocked. This happened when the inspired Antioch manuscripts called the Textus Receptus were replaced by the Alexandrian manuscripts called the Codex B or the Vaticanus from the Vatican basement, and the Sianiticus from a monestary. They do not agree with each other and the latter has about 30 changes per page. Obviously inspired by their spiritual father who brings conflict, frustration, despair and DOUBT. King James Bible online Helpful tool: Noah Webster 1828 Dictionary online: Look up: REPENT, REGENERATION, BELIEVE, FAITH, REDEMPTION, PERFECT, CONVERSATION, PREVENT, PROPITIATION etc. Suppliers: Churchkjb.com Localchurchbiblepublishers.com Sources: Adullum Films Documentary -Tares Among the Wheat video Books: The Revision Revised and The Last Twelve Verses of Mark, both by William Burgon. Dean Burgon lived during the time of Wescott and Hort. Book: Look What's Missing by David Daniels Chick.com. If interested an old video called The Forbidden Book video. It has some American History also.

Try this: www.google.co.uk/search?biw=1536&bih=722&tbm=isch&sxsrf=ACYBGNT5LmjwdpDYbDm1IE-2ahOt1EdjWQ%3A1575281926331&sa=1&ei=BuXkXaThE8611fAPjfq6wA4&q=bible+translation+chart&oq=bible+tr&gs_l=img.3.1.35i39l2j0l8.8211.8406..10973...0.0..0.62.219.4......0....1..gws-wiz-img.RwNc-oiHX7M

Airik1111 always there to save the day! I was thinking the same thing. 👍🏻

king james version all the way but i would not condemn anyone reading another version as long as it leads them closer to God

Very interesting brother. I need to research all this now but with those for and against what you're saying so I don't go too far down a rabbit hole that might not be true. Pray for me for discernment as I continue on this journey to discover the truth. Every blessing in Christ Jesus

Damon Greville thank you!

Damon I hope that book is coming along!

Damon, very good and accurate analysis as to what I understand in having read concerning the subject. Thanks for posting.

Awesome!

It is a Jesuit translation. Jesuit oath library of congress.

I don't read it personally and I find the language a bit outdated to be an easy read. I know there are some issues around parts of the translation but that is something I want to look into more.

Both quote Jesus in a lie, John 7:8. There is a huge difference between not going and not going yet. Amazingly, some people need more proof than that. Do your research. Read: Look What's Missing by David Daniels Chick Publication. Chick.com.

@@judyswiderski2682 , I just wanted to let you know that I have made the KJV my primary Bible for study, reading, and meditation. Other translations simply do not have the "high voltage" of the KJV. Blessings to you.

@@Pastor4all52 May He bless you with words that will reach many in this time of need. For the need will certainly increase as perilous times unfold. As many of us can plainly see. I pray that He will use you to bring many to Him. Proverbs 22:17-21, Proverbs 13:13.

It just computedee that the KJB is your primary bible. What fellowship does darkness have with light? Is not the Holy Spirit sufficient to teach you? 1 John 2:27 It is your decision. The Q is, does it please God?

Good question! I think that it is the most literal but readable version. They trust it and can understadnn it.

It must be more than that. Does the ESV have reform theology leanings?

@@kryzaly Yes I would say that, especially the ESV Study Version would back up that claim.

Let me run something by you, if you don't mind. I have lots of different study Bibles and something is beginning to concern me. I think there is a real danger in looking for the commentary to do all our thinking for us. Afterall, we have the same Holy Spirit to teach us the meaning of Scripture that the men who write the study Bible commentary. And only Holy Scripture is inspired, the commentary part is not. Besides men can be wrong. What think ye?

I fully agree. In Mathew 18:34, it's the difference between interpreting the word "torturer" vs the word "inquisitor." This completely changes the meaning of what's going on, and torturer seems to make little sense with relation to what's going on in context, but inquisitor makes perfect sense.

Take a look at this book. ''The Four Gospels at a Glance''. That sums up a lot. The puzzles (verses) are put together nicely. All questions resolve themselves, and all of this without any comments from the author. It came out late last year. In the various comparative tests, it always comes out as the winner. A real helper for the reader. I can only recommend. www.amazon.com/-/es/American-Standard-Version-Asv/dp/3752610328/ref=sr_1_2?__mk_es_US=%C3%85M%C3%85%C5%BD%C3%95%C3%91&crid=2SSY6ZWMVBPUF&dchild=1&keywords=the+four+gospels+at+a+glance&qid=1619626380&sprefix=the+four+gospels+at+%2Caps%2C246&sr=8-2

@@NKWTI I looked up over 12 translations of the verse in Matthew you posted. 10 of them said torture or tormentors. Only one mentioned inquisitor. How do you figure it’s the correct translation?

Context is king!

There are so many translations out there! But thanks for putting it in the comments so other can see.

Hi Jay, thanks for the comment and question. I think that when it comes to Bible translations it can become a minefield. I have to trust that those scholars who sit and discuss the original Hebrew and Greek documents are being true to the Word of God and not trying to add or take anything away. I studied Greek at college and struggled with it and didn't even start Hebrew! We also have to factor in, for example, most of what Jesus said is written in Greek whereas we know that He spoke in Aramaic and there must have been a few translation difficulties from Aramaic to Greek. I don't think that anything is watered down because we have more access to Hebrew and Greek manuscripts than ever before and there is a fair amount of scholarly debate about the accuracy of these that are used. I think you are right to use a concordance and it is also right to see what different translations say and then to try to understand what the original writer once wrote. We also have the unknown factors of the mistakes that the early transcribers made, but in saying that there is good evidence with the number of fragments that we have now we can be pretty certain of what we have is accurate. This is why I like to read bibles that are debated and put together through committee rather than an individual because these issues are hammered out. I hope this helps and just to add that this is all about people using the giftings that God has given them and I have to trust that these people are doing just that because unfortunately, it is not one of mine. I think that most of the publishers would answer an email if you sent it to them asking some questions that you have. I hope this helps, Dan.

What manuscripts do they use to translate these Bibles also matter I believe through my understanding that most of them use the eastern text the early church did not when you look back over the first few centuries when you read over sermon notes they quoted mostly the texus receptius. Hope I spelled that right...

Yes, the ESV leaves verses out. Not just words. You need to look at who translated it, the scholars and the publishing company. Most are Calvinists. The Bible is "Calvinist-leaning". Their doctrine influences the way they view prophecy for example. That is reflected in the Bible, with verses taken out!