The very last argument you make is powerful, the connection between the common KJVO argument ("You believe Scripture was lost for 1,800 years!") and this claim from Truth is Christ that he's discovered something no one else has seen before.
@rodneyjackson6181
4 ай бұрын
"If you torture the data long enough, it will confess to anything." (Dr. Chuck Missler) I have never seen so much mythology, eisegesis and arrogant assertions and attacks as I have seen from King James Onlyism. Epic!!
@evanarmont
4 ай бұрын
Some KJV-onlyists are willing to say just about anything, no matter how ridiculous (like the belief that the Bible didn't exist before 1611) or dishonest (like the claim that modern Bibles deny the Trinity) in order to justify self-righteousness and accusing others of having no faith in the Bible
@EdmundTrujillo
4 ай бұрын
Problem here is that the Word of God is not data.
@rodneyjackson6181
4 ай бұрын
This whole subject is about a guy trying to manipulate numbers to confirm his pre-determined outcome. The Hebrew and Greek letters all have numeric values to them. Data is about numbers and knowledge and it is throughout the Word of God. Pastor Burris thoroughly dismantled this guys mythology with correct data. Lastly, there were no chapters and verses when the Word of God was written. That came much later, so to try to use chapter and verse numbers to promote this theory is ridiculous.
@jonathanchaney5896
4 ай бұрын
@@EdmundTrujillo I would agree. But Brandon’s equations make it seem that way. Nothing about the actual words mean, just formulas and numbers to crunch.
@carolbarlow8896
4 ай бұрын
It just cracks me up that NONE of these dudes preach from the 1611. I’ve never met one.
@ScriptureHighlights-ee1tc
4 ай бұрын
The 1769 Cambridge or Oxford, or the 1900 Pure Cambridge are not a radically different textual editions of the 1611. While there are super small minor differences that are not substantive changes, it reflects what the 1611 says. They did not gather another 47 translators for the 1769 Cambridge or Oxford or the Pure Cambridge KJV. It is merely the updating of spelling, grammar, and the fixing of printing errors. By 1900, that is when the printing technology was perfected whereby it did not create errors like previous printing methods. Any small minor changes that do not affect doctrine between the KJV editions pales in comparison to the intentional changes made in Modern Bibles that DO affect doctrine in many places. George Vance Smith was a Unitarian and he was on the Westcott and Hort Revised Version committee. Vance wrote a book of the changed doctrines he did in the Revised Version (i.e., Text and Margins of the Revised New Testament). So it is not a coincidence that Modern Translations water down the deity of Jesus Christ and remove direct references of the Trinity. This is nothing new. Men through history have reported how the Arians were setting out to corrupt the texts of the Bible even way back in their day. Of course, I could mention the other problems like the RCC, and Bruce Metzger, too.
@evanarmont
4 ай бұрын
Interesting, isn't it? The most extreme ones act as if God Himself inspired its translation, yet claim it needed to be purified through 7 revisions (misusing Psalm 12:6-7) in order to become the "perfectly preserved Word of God" when people point out that they are using the 1769 Oxford edition
@evanarmont
4 ай бұрын
@@ScriptureHighlights-ee1tc Modern translations don't water down His deity, that's not even remotely true. Every verse referring to His deity is in modern translations, except for 1 John 5:7, which exists in less than 10 Greek manuscripts from over 1000 years after the originals. One case that makes His deity even more clear is in John 1:18, where He is referred to as the "only begotten God"
@carolbarlow8896
4 ай бұрын
@@evanarmont Yep. Mark Ward made that very point on his channel recently.
@evanarmont
4 ай бұрын
@@carolbarlow8896 Oh nice, I also watch Mark Ward
@anthonykeve8894
4 ай бұрын
Brandon is a “close cousin” to Riplinger
@anthonykeve8894
4 ай бұрын
I appreciate your use and context of “opinion” early on in this video. Brandon is another desperate person demonstrating desperate measures to draw a picoscopically thin line, many parsecs in length between the truth & KJ only-ism
@CoryWillis
4 ай бұрын
Dr. Robert Pothoff told me I wasn't allowed to interpret the Bible yet the KJV-O guys do this mathematic gymnastics to defend their false traditions!
@pastorburris
4 ай бұрын
If you pour the miracle water on your graphics card before powering on your computer, you will see smoke like from the altar of incense. Hallelujah!
@CoryWillis
4 ай бұрын
@@pastorburris Your videos have really helped me in conversations with KJV-O believers. My pastor is KJV-O but is much more understanding than most. He just believes that the KJV is the translation to use in the pulpit while he's the pastor. I've had conversations about this topic and will be having more hopefully. It's at least encouraging knowing that he's okay with my position and teaching in other translations since I'm the youth leader at our church. God bless!
@ScriptureHighlights-ee1tc
4 ай бұрын
@@CoryWillis People see what they want to see to fit their own narrative. If you don’t want a perfect Bible, join the Critical Text camp that has ever shape shifting Bibles that all disagree with each other (i.e., confusion). If you want to believe the Bible at face value in what it says about itself in that it is perfect and will be preserved forever, then we need to look and find such a book. The KJV is the best candidate. By way of comparison to the KJV, the Modern Bibles teach wrong doctrines in many places. Also, George Vance Smith was a Unitarian who worked on the Revised Version committee and he wrote a book talking about the changes he made in this translation (i.e., Texts and Margines of the Revised New Testament). You have the longer ending in Mark questioned or deleted. Direct references of the Trinity are removed. The deity of Christ is watered down in 20 places according to my study. Modern Bibles leave room for abortion. Modern Bibles remove the truth in 1 Timothy 6 in that you are not to fellowship with money worshiping Christians. Modern Bibles just teach you are to pray to cast out exceptionally strong demons. However, the KJV properly teaches that you are to fast and pray to do this. All of this junk comes from just the uplifting of two manuscripts by two men who were liberal (i.e., Westcott and Hort). This is just the tip of the iceberg of the problems with the Modern Bible Movement.
@ScriptureHighlights-ee1tc
4 ай бұрын
@CoryWillis Well, you are going to get good and bad in every camp. This is not a good reason in my opinion to reject the idea of a perfect and preserved Word as the Bible plainly teaches. 1 Corinthians 1:10 says we are all to speak the same thing. How is that possible in the Modern Bible Movement? Proverbs 22:20-21 says we can have the knowledge of the certainty of the words of truth. Do you have the certainty of the knowledge of the words of truth? Or are there footnotes hissing in the background like a serpent making you to doubt the longer ending in Mark, and the story of the woman caught in the acts of adultery, etcetera? Anyway, the Modern Bible Movement truly puzzles me. There are too many evidences to show it is not the correct path to follow. One either builds their Bibliology by faith from the Bible or they don’t. It’s just that simple.
@jonathanchaney5896
4 ай бұрын
@@ScriptureHighlights-ee1tc you make it a dichotomy. Who says I’m not believing by faith in the word, simply because I rely on what the Hebrew and Greek says as my standard?
@banmancan1894
4 ай бұрын
Not gonna lie, I thought he was gonna say Accordance. Thought I was gonna have to throw hands over the honor of my primary Bible software. 😂
@19nineteenthirteen19
4 ай бұрын
Can you do a series on this?
@19nineteenthirteen19
4 ай бұрын
Very informative video. Thank you. I've been trying to reach out to James White about this and he mentioned it on the dividing line last night. Actually showed a clip from this show which is why I subscribed. My Dad is really into this Brandon guy so I'm trying to get a handle on all of this KJV-only stuff .....I love the NASB95 but hey😊
@ScriptureHighlights-ee1tc
4 ай бұрын
@19nineteenthirteen19 Are telling me that Jesus’ name (When it only refers to the person of Jesus) appearing 70 x 7 times in both the odd and even books of the New Testament is a coincidence? This is not something you can just write off as unimportant because Jesus told us to forgive 70 x 7 times. Jesus is tied to forgiveness. This is just the tip of the iceberg even if you do not agree with the 1611 numerical pattern discovered. There are some numerical patterns I would not agree with brother Brandon on. But there are many that would make you to drop to your knees and worship the LORD in the fact that He did actually keep His promise in preserving His Word.
@TruthisChrist
4 ай бұрын
Brother Jonathan, the way you presented this video, and the comments you have left about me "making up rules to confirm my own bias..." it shows me a clear picture of someone who has not done their due diligence on this issue. But that's okay. You made your point. Now anybody can come and see if that argument bears its weight on the entire body of research, if they so choose. We are saved by nothing by the blood and grace of our Lord Jesus Christ. And all I have is grace and love toward you. Your brother in Christ, Brandon
@pastorburris
4 ай бұрын
You and I have already had dialog on this issue under Roy Bell’s channel. There, you admitted that your work is biased and unscholarly. It is entirely subjective and confirmation bias. In this video, you will use LORD, Lord, and lord to reach your results along with every occurrence of “his name” regardless of whether these are referring to God or man. Yet when you use Jesus, you have to eliminate where Jesus is used for Joshua. You are inconsistent and unfounded in your selective misuse of the text to defend your preconceived conclusion. Further, it is ludicrous to use Deuteronomy 16:11 to defend the 1769 when your own rules do not even apply to the 1611. The only thing you have been consistent on is your inconsistency. Yes, I believe you are a brother, but your focus is misguided and based on fantasy and bias. You are causing undue division within the body of Christ and causing distrust in the word of God.
@TruthisChrist
4 ай бұрын
@@pastorburris Brother Jonathan, If you ever do a future video, I would like to see you break down to your audience the distinction I make on my channel between Raw and Pure patterns. This is not some sort of hidden thing- that I resort to using different forms of logic. Back in the 1611 video, all of this was very new. But for the past year or so, I began to differentiate them and classify them. Here is the problem we run into: whichever class you go with, you are faced with a cloud of high-magnitude witnesses- all within that same class (raw or pure), making it so that you cannot explain it all away as merely coincidental, even without considering the other side of the coin. So, whether you go with Raw-only or Pure-only as the only form of logic, you will have to face the greater patterns that all exist within that class. I recommend instead of dissecting an isolated Raw Pattern as you did here, do a breakdown of the strongest Pure patterns- so that the strength of evidence is accurately represented. Show those which are dealing directly in context with the numbers found in the text of scriptures. (E.g. The names of the fishermen who catch the 153 fishes appearing 153 times in the Gospels, or all the 70x7 patterns related to the name of Jesus, or the patterns related to 7) Grace and peace in the Lord Jesus Christ, Brandon
@r.m.solympic1771
4 ай бұрын
Very interesting, thank you.
@brad32443
4 ай бұрын
Wait, wait, wait... You are telling me that KJVO numerology is silly?
@EdmundTrujillo
4 ай бұрын
Wait wait wait. You’re saying that God doesn’t use patterns and numbers in his word? Yeah i guess that I do recall 6 churches, 14 candlesticks, 31 seals, 3 trumpets, and 16 thunders and let’s not forget the 143,999 saints all in the last book of the Bible.
@jonathanchaney5896
4 ай бұрын
@@EdmundTrujillobut those numbers are in the text. They are not found in mathematic formulas that only exist in one edition of one specific foreign language translation.
@EdmundTrujillo
4 ай бұрын
@@jonathanchaney5896my point is that God uses numbers in obvious and not so obvious ways. 😊 the only “formula” used is addition. That is, the word counts and positions have very interesting patterns that seem to coincide with multiples of 7. Test other versions and the pattern doesn’t exist. How do you explain the beautiful patterns that transcend human understanding? I follow the data which can be reproduced and verified. The data points to a supernatural origin outside of our space and time domain. Someone on here quoted Chuck Missler about “torturing the data”. Are you not aware of his book “Cosmic Codes”? Missler often talked about supernatural aspects of the design of the text specifically the Hebrew and Greek. Too bad he died before the time of revelations of the special patterns that exist in the KJB.
@jonathanchaney5896
4 ай бұрын
@@EdmundTrujillo "test other versions and the pattern doesn't exist". But the KJV doesn't even hold up to the same test. Just look at the 49th word in Duet. 16:11. It doesn't work under the 1611, only the 1769 revision. So does that mean the 1611 isn't pure but the 1769 is? The patterns don't hold up when you actually scrutinize them. Muslims have this for the Quran. Mormons have something similar for the Book of Mormon. How can you set down and compare with them when they say, "Oh yeah, let me show you the numbers on my book...". You can't do it. Yes God uses numbers. They are throughout His scripture. But He never says count the words to verify the truthfulness. Or look for patterns to verify My word. Or go tell others about word placement and number of times my name is in the Scriptures. All of that is superstition. Let me just ask you, if you'll answer: did this "code" convince you of the veracity of Scripture or did you find this after you were a believer?
@ScriptureHighlights-ee1tc
4 ай бұрын
@@jonathanchaney5896 Uh, no. The Muslims do not have the same level of patterns as found like in the KJB. Not even close. Brandon already did a video on this point. Look at the presentation by Brandon that is titled, the KJB Superseded the Hebrew and Greek. If after see that presentation and then you say it is just random chance, then you can believe such nonsense if you like. But in the meantime, most here will simply bask in the sun of ignorance, and they will not be fair with information Brandon presents. It is attack the information. I do not agree with every numerical pattern by Brandon. But some are really good and you cannot explain them away as random chance. Also, try reading Revelation 13:18 a few times in the KJV. It is talking to the reader who has wisdom already in counting. Note: Wisdom is knowledge + experience.
@galacticdivinity
2 ай бұрын
Hello. Thank you for making this video. I do agree with you. However, can you please make an additional video or a reply to this comment refuting the many occurrences of seven that Brandon Peterson discusses? Again, I do agree with you, but I simply cannot understand how his findings are coincidental. Thanks. *Such as these:* Did you know… Moses + Jesus + Christ (John 1:17) = 7×7×7×7 appearances in the KJB? (Excluding antimentions such as false Christs) (Detailed on p. 70) Did you know… Father + Son = 7 mentions in Revelation, 7×7×7 mentions in the Gospels, and 70×7 mentions in the entire Bible? (Excluding antimentions such as Father Abraham) (Detailed on pp. 88-94) Did you know… Jesus Christ is mentioned 7 times in Revelation and T7×7 times in the entire Bible? What is T7×7, you ask? T7×7 = (7×1)+(7×2)+(7×3)+(7×4)+(7×5)+(7×6)+(7×7) When you write it out line by line, it forms a perfect triangle with seven sevens on each side. Like this… 7 + 7 + 7 + 7 + 7 + 7 + 7 + 7 + 7 + 7 + 7 + 7 + 7 + 7 + 7 + 7 + 7 + 7 + 7 + 7 + 7 + 7 + 7 + 7 + 7 + 7 + 7 + 7 = Total mentions of Jesus Christ in the KJB (Detailed on p.96) Here are a few titles / summarizations of the notes that are detailed within: The 777 Code of Matthew 1:1 The 777 First and Last Words of the Bible ("In" Gen 1:1 / "Amen" Rev 22:21) in Genesis & Revelation. God Directly Speaking 7×7×7 words in Genesis 1, and 7×7 words in Matthew 1 The Father + The Word + Holy Ghost (1 John 5:7) = 777 mentions God + Jesus + Holy Spirit = 777+777+777 mentions in the New Testament Moses + Jesus + Christ (John 1:17) = 7×7×7×7 appearances in the verse text of the Entire Bible The #777 mention of Jesus is in the same verse as the #77 mention of Holy Ghost Jesus + Christ = 777+777 appearances in the Bible And many, many more That's text quoted from his book description (not from the book itself--but from the description available to all) of "Sealed by the King" on Amazon. Thank you!
@19nineteenthirteen19
4 ай бұрын
I think Terrance Howard is around here somewhere 😂
@EdmundTrujillo
4 ай бұрын
There are simply TOO MANY beautiful patterns only found in the KJB. I became a KJ B respecter BECAUSE the amazing and beautiful patterns found exclusively in the KJB., not the other way around. The patterns if false should not be there or should be easily falsifiable. There’s way too many patterns found. You’ve pointed out some valid criticisms but if your criticism is entirely valid, then these patterns will exist in other translations. Please show more criticisms as Brandon specifically asks for corrections. It’s true that the spelling and words vary between 1611 and 1769. I’m simply amazed at how the KJB version we have now in the end times can authenticate Gods almighty word.
@hayfieldhermit9657
3 ай бұрын
Jesus' name is the 7th word in the NEW KING JAMES NEW TESTAMENT.... and his name is the 7th word from the end of the NEW KING JAMES NEW TESTAMENT. Since this was stated as a positive thing for the KJV, we should be consistent and give the NKJV the same respect for containing some of the exact same special numbers as the KJV.....I wont hold my breath waiting for people to care since it doesnt affirm the KJV only position. Confirmation bias is strong with them.
@randywheeler3914
3 ай бұрын
No...its the NIV that's perfect...The NIV was released in 1978. Look up Psalm 19:7-8. "The Law of the Lord is PERFECT... The commandment of the Lord is PURE..." Therefore, the NIV is the better translation... See how ridiculous this argument sounds..😂😂😂
@hayfieldhermit9657
3 ай бұрын
@@randywheeler3914 Ha! Exactly right. If there actually were NIV only people, they would plaster this all over the internet with click-bait titles like "INFALLIBLE PROOF THE NIV IS PERFECT!!!!!!!!!!!!". Uhhggg.... Can't we just go back to the days where we read the text to see what it means? No. I guess that's asking too much.
@randywheeler3914
3 ай бұрын
@@hayfieldhermit9657 I used to be King James only but now I have found I have a deeper spiritual understanding by reading and studying multiple translations I'm glad you seen the humor and sarcasm in my previous reply LOL
@hayfieldhermit9657
3 ай бұрын
@@randywheeler3914 I used to be KJV only too. The last straw for me was when I read the KJV translators preface in the front of my Bible. They quoted Jerome, saying, it was good to use multiple translations to find the sense of the meaning. And then they said they thought it was necessary to have translators notes also.... I thought that if the translators who read the Hebrew and Greek and translated it themselves were saying these things, then there is a reason why. And I think it became obvious why they said those things after I got a Bible with all of the original KJV notes in it and started reading them. And then incorporating a 2nd translation was also eye opening sometimes. All in all, after doing what the KJV translators suggested, I would say they were correct in what they said. I agree with them 100% So now I'm not KJV only, but I guess I'm KJV translator affirming! HA! Who would have thought that possible?
@classicchristianliterature
4 ай бұрын
Lots of folks will say “but this isn’t representative of all KJV onlyists”. True, but having a fringe conspiracy belief about only 1 translation of the Bible being the only one we should use is usually associated with other fringe conspiracy theories…
@evanarmont
4 ай бұрын
Im convinced many KJVOs have never bothered to open a modern Bible, because some believe they "deny" the Trinity About the only verse that is "missing" in most of them (except NKJV & MEV) is 1 John 5:7 Every other verse proving that God is triune is present, and no true doctrine of Christianity is affected by slightly different wording
@classicchristianliterature
4 ай бұрын
@@evanarmont true they have been told that people are not saved who use modern versions that they are all satanic Bible translations… So King James only folks view the ESV NIV NASB the same way they would view something Satanic
@4jgarner
4 ай бұрын
And, sadly, this is honestly not *that* fringe for KJVO. Ice encountered plenty of people doing this stuff within this movement.
@jasonwells5760
4 ай бұрын
@@evanarmont Well, there's a big difference between "only begotten Son" and "only begotten god" in John 1:18. Also, the omission of "without a cause" in Matthew 5:22 affects a key attribute of the Lord Jesus Christ.
@evanarmont
4 ай бұрын
@@jasonwells5760 Jesus being referred to as "the only begotten God" affirms that He is God, and we know the Scripture cannot be broken, as God says He knows not one god besides Himself (Isaiah 44:8) As far as the "without cause" statement, some older Greek manuscripts, closer to the time of the original writings, and therefore less likely to contain copyist errors, which we have good reason to trust, do not contain it
@joelooney7201
4 ай бұрын
Thank you. I appreciate that you do this research.
@anthonykeve8894
Ай бұрын
Thousands, perhaps hundreds of thousands of true God-fearing, Jesus-loving Christians have been martyred and/or just became part of the dead-in-Christ w/less than perfect, incomplete vernacular* translations in their hands. *in their common tongue (other than English)
@notsatch
4 ай бұрын
They've reached the level of absurdity, having crossed over into the realms of mysticism and numerology.
@ScriptureHighlights-ee1tc
4 ай бұрын
Revelation 13:18 actually tells the reader who has wisdom in counting already to count the number of the beast. Wisdom is knowledge + experience. Man's number is 6 just as God's number is 7. Sometimes God's number can appear as 777 in the Bible that represents the number 7. So that is why the beast's number is man's number (666). In addition, 2 Timothy 3:16 says all Scripture is profitable. Do you not believe that the numbers in the Bible are a part of Scripture? If so, would they not be profitable, too? Who ever said that numbers in the Bible is simply filler information or junk? Why does God have feasts of sevens? Why does Revelation have hundreds of the number 7 in it? Why did God tell Joshua and his people to march around Jericho 7 times? Do you really expect me to believe that if Joshua asked God why he was marching around Jericho 7 times, that. God's answer would be.... "No reason, I just wanted you to do it that many times." That sounds silly. Plus, 1 Corinthians 14 says there is not a voice that is without significance. Do you believe God's Word (voice) on numbers in the Bible is without significance? There is even a book called Numbers in the Bible. God numbers the stars, and counts the hairs of our head. God counts our steps and He knows the number of our days. God is also a God of numbers. He is Lord after all of all things. Granted, I am not telling you to dive into the deep end of Biblical Numerics. I merely bring them up on occasion to show that God's Word (the Bible) is holy as 2 Timothy 3:15 says.
@pastorburris
4 ай бұрын
Is there any place in scripture where you are taught to count words and syllables and verses? No. There is not. You really want to form a hermeneutic based on one specific example in the scripture that clearly refers to a single individual? You would probably love Mormonism. That’s what they do.
@ScriptureHighlights-ee1tc
4 ай бұрын
@@pastorburris Uh, well, people can read Revelation 13:18 for themselves in the King James Bible, and see that what you say is not so, my friend. Side Note: I am trying to understand you. Do you take the English as authoritative in any way, or are you looking to just the Greek alone on this verse?
@geraldbagby8880
4 ай бұрын
The problem with this view of the number of the beast in Revelation 13:18 is that the number is not six, six, six. It is six hundred sixty six. Even the KJV states it as six hundred threescore and six. Some manuscripts have the number as six hundred and sixteen. Interestingly, both numbers fit Nero Ceasar depending on the language in which his name is written. With regard to the numerology concerning chapter and verse numbers, the original manuscripts did not contain them. They were added much later (in the 1500s) to make it easier to locate sections of scripture.
@ScriptureHighlights-ee1tc
4 ай бұрын
@@geraldbagby8880 No. "Six hundred threescore and six" refers to the number 666. This expression uses an uncommon way of counting, where: "Six hundred" is 600, "Threescore" is 60 (since a score is 20, thus threescore is 3 times 20), And "six" is 6. So, 600 + 60 + 6 = 666. As for the other manuscripts: Why would I care about them? Were they used by the church?
@kdeh21803
4 ай бұрын
This is just like preacher's I heard in the early 70's that preached that the Bible told you not to wear wire rimmed glasses!
@annakimborahpa
4 ай бұрын
Because of John Lennon's Imagine?
@kdeh21803
4 ай бұрын
@@annakimborahpa ?
@annakimborahpa
4 ай бұрын
John Lennon: Imagine there's no heaven It's easy if you try No hell below us Above us only sky Imagine all the people living for today Imagine there's no countries It isn't hard to do Nothing to kill or die for And no religion too Imagine all the people living life in peace, you You may say I'm a dreamer But I'm not the only one I hope some day you'll join us And the world will be as one Imagine no possessions I wonder if you can No need for greed or hunger A brotherhood of man Imagine all the people sharing all the world, you You may say I'm a dreamer But I'm not the only one I hope some day you'll join us And the world will be as one
@kdeh21803
4 ай бұрын
@@annakimborahpa I guess he knows the truth now.
@annakimborahpa
4 ай бұрын
1. Before his life was cut short in 1980 at the age of 40 by a deranged fan who shot him with a handgun, John Lennon had changed his tune on faith in God. 2. Dedicating it to his wife, he wrote the song "Grow Old With Me" five months before his death, and his raw recording of it was touched up and released posthumously in 1984. 3. "Grow Old With Me" by John Lennon Grow old along with me The best is yet to be When our time has come We will be as one God bless our love God bless our love Grow old along with me Two branches of one tree Face the setting sun When the day is done God bless our love God bless our love Spending our lives together Man and wife together World without end World without end Grow old along with me Whatever fate decrees We will see it through For our love is true God bless our love God bless our love
@michaelroots6931
4 ай бұрын
The length people go to justify a belief.
@davidemme2344
4 ай бұрын
First there is only one book that has divinely inspired chapter divisions and that is the book of Psalms. All other chapter and Verse divisions did not come about until Stephanus started dividing verse and chapters for his Greek texts. They love this ideal of "777" in contra to "666" Here is the big problem with this besides not being found in the scriptures....Aliester Crowley also uses "777" ain his numerology and is even a in the title of one of his books. The pastor here did not cover this (and maybe he did in a different video) but be aware of the satanic connotations of numerology.
@mrmister6058
4 ай бұрын
You should do a video on the kjv only crowd and ask, are they saved? I myself ask the question, what leads a person astray or lead them to think the kjv is the true word of God. I mean what's behind the movement, is it God or not? Is it godly to condemn other children of God just because of the kjv.
@brothermike434
4 ай бұрын
I am so thankful you are willing to put in the hard work to expose this nonsense. It’s reminiscent of the Bible Codes from some years back. Some PhD did a similar study using Herman Melville’s Moby Dick and got the same results. It’s all just a distraction from the message of the Gospel. Thanks Doc! Blessings
@ScriptureHighlights-ee1tc
4 ай бұрын
Of course this is just a scarecrow tactic. Revelation 13:18 actually tells you the reader who already has wisdom in counting to count the number of the beast. This assumes that the person already had experience in counting.
@ScriptureHighlights-ee1tc
4 ай бұрын
Actually, Brandon Peterson has the gospel message at the end of his 1611 video and encourages a person to accept Jesus Christ. The video is actually a great witnesses tool.
@brothermike434
4 ай бұрын
@@ScriptureHighlights-ee1tc this counting word occurrences absolutely is a distraction from the Gospel and making disciples. But just for giggles, are you counting the number of the beast in Greek or Hebrew?
@ScriptureHighlights-ee1tc
4 ай бұрын
@@brothermike434 While I am not against the Greek of the KJB (Which is based mostly on Beza's 5th edition) or the Hebrew, the problem in relying too much on the ancient languages over the English is that you are claiming you know more than the 47 translators of the KJB who did know the languages and you are pretending to know these languages when you really don't know them. In either case, your missing the point. It tells the reader who has wisdom in counting already to count the number of the beast. So counting things in the Bible is actually taught as per Revelation 13:18. it is simply a matter of faith of whether you believe that verse or not. Most today believe in only parts of the Bible. For me, its either an all or nothing package. In any event, I will leave you with Jesus' words. He said, God is not the God of the dead, but of the living.
@brothermike434
4 ай бұрын
@@ScriptureHighlights-ee1tc Good on Brandon! Maybe one day he’ll reverse the percentages and Christ will have the preeminence and not this word counting silliness.
@ScriptureHighlights-ee1tc
4 ай бұрын
In defense of the criticism of Brandon’s 1611 discovery found in the 1769 KJV: Well, there is nothing wrong with revealing a 1611 mathematical pattern in Deuteronomy 16 that is found in the 1769 KJV, and yet it is not found in the 1611 KJV. First, you have to understand that there is a difference between the original hand-written master copy of the KJV (that we do not have), and the 1st printed edition of the KJV. The first printed edition of the KJV had printing errors within it. So proper investigation on the exact edition they fixed these printing errors would take more considerable study by looking to the different KJV editions instead of a person just jumping to the wrong conclusions. In fact, there are two different 1611 editions. Most Critical Text advocates are not looking to be fair with this kind of data. They are not going to seek out in defending the innocence of the KJV by looking to the different KJV editions because they already have a preference or bias to Vaticanus and Sinaiticus manuscripts (despite that they have corrections on them, they contradict each other in thousands of places, and they contain doctrinal problems, etcetera). Second, the 1769 KJV edition would not exist if it was not for the 1611. Without the 47 translators of the KJV, no 1769 edition could ever exist. The intent of Blayney (1769 Oxford) and Pollard (1900 Pure Cambridge) were to each create their own KJV editions that would most accurately represent the original 1611. It was not their intent to make an entirely new Sham-Wow Bible with entirely new content. Three, no new manuscript sources were consulted, unlike with the different editions of Modern Bibles that make new changes that are for the worse. For example: In Mark 1:41, the NIV made a new change in one of their new editions that states that Jesus was indignant (angry) when He healed the leper (instead of healing the leper with compassion) because of some new and exciting manuscript discovery. Nothing bad like this had ever taken place with the 1769 KJV or the KJV Pure Cambridge (circa 1900). Four, God also knows that the 1611 would not be the KJV edition that most Christians today would use, but it would be a perfected or refined version of the 1611. The two most popular KJV editions in use today by the church are the 1769 Blayney Oxford edition, and the 1900 Pure Cambridge edition (with the Apocrypha removed). These editions still reflect the work of the Holy Scriptures of the 1611 KJV, without which such editions would not exist. These editions are meant to reflect what the 47 translators created in 1611. Five, the bulk of the work of the KJV 1611 is what makes it the translation it is today. So even if the 1769 KJV has a numerical pattern for 1611, it still is significant because that is the groundwork or basis of the translation itself. 1611 is the year the KJV came into existence. To say that God cannot use the 1769 KJV to refer back to the 1611 original KJV (a significant event in Bible history) by biblical numerics is a logical fallacy. The Old and New Testaments point back and forth to each other in many places. There are no official rules that say that it must be 1611 KJV in order for a 1611 KJV numerical pattern to be valid. Such rules are simply man-made.
@jonathanchaney5896
4 ай бұрын
“Such rules are man-made”. With all due respect, so is your entire argument because absolutely none of the formulas and code are found in the words of scripture. 😕
@hayfieldhermit9657
3 ай бұрын
Hi, I'm from the future, here to invite you to first independent Baptist church....bring your tarrot cards and have your palms ready to be read. After palm reading we share our dreams we dreamed up with our neighbors.....
@billcovington5836
4 ай бұрын
Thank you ! I have found that the NKJV has the word for word traditional text above and in the apparatus below, we have the NA28, USB and the other variants. I’ve also found that the NIV the CSB the NASB and all the others have the traditional text variants below in the apparatus. So I have concluded that I have the complete Word of God, either above or below. So, as found in the NKJV, I myself prefer to have the modern textual variant readings below in the apparatus and the traditional text in the top. Others might prefer the other way, but yes we have the word of God. So the debate for me has ended.
@evanarmont
4 ай бұрын
That's a good way to look at it
@ScriptureHighlights-ee1tc
4 ай бұрын
@PastorBurris: Look at time stamp 20:57. Brandon does show the lowercase word “lord.” The Hebrew word Adon (Strong’s H113) can refer to master or even God (like the words, “our Lord” in Psalms 8:1). The Hebrew word “Adon” is the root word of “Adonai.” So you really have not disproven his number counts. The KJV is the Bible or the Scriptures and God’s name is placed in it. The 1611 patterns still work. You have not disproven this mathematical miracle in the Bible he discovered.
@pastorburris
4 ай бұрын
But”lord” has nothing to do with YHWH or Lord. Counting the occurrences where it is talking about someone other than God is ludicrous. The same thing applies to “his name”. Brandon displays his own hypocrisy in using it here, but when he uses the tool for “Jesus”, he has to eliminate “Jesus” where it is referring to Joshua in the New Testament. That is inconsistency and hypocrisy and nothing more than confirmation bias.
@ScriptureHighlights-ee1tc
4 ай бұрын
@@pastorburris Do you think Psalms 8:1 “our Lord” (the Hebrew word Adon) is not in reference to God? Jesus is one with the Father. Whether it human masters or God with the words “LORD,” “Lord,” “lord.” it does not matter. Jesus comes from the line of Adam (whereby all men came). Jesus is the Lord of Lords. Yes, the Trinity teaches that God is one God, and He is three distinct persons, but Jesus also said He is one with the Father. So the sacred name of God mentioned in Deuteronomy 16:11 while it appears to be in reference to God the Father, we know also that Jesus is Eternal Logos who was always one with Him (the Father).
@jonathanchaney5896
4 ай бұрын
@@pastorburris exactly! KJV only cannot be consistent in how it argues its points. It will go one way and then throw the same way under the bus when it doesn't work the next time. It's completely arbitrary because it always starts with the conclusion first.
@jonathanchaney5896
4 ай бұрын
@@ScriptureHighlights-ee1tc but you're missing what Jonathan is saying. If he exudes the names of Jesus that are not Jesus to prove a point, he should also remove the "lord"'s that do not address God. It's the consistent thing to do if you want to actually prove some sort of point. Otherwise, it just seems completely arbitrary and subjective, which ultimately "proves" nothing. It's like the KJVO who love to point out the English reformation Bibles that agree with the KJV. But let the Geneva disagree or Bishop's disagree, and they will quickly be thrown under the bus.
@CrimsonRunnerToJesus
2 сағат бұрын
@@pastorburris Brandon counts LORD, Lord and 'lord' because God became 'man' (hence lord w/lower case l) regardless what 'lord' (man) is mentioned. And did He not die and resurrect FOR 'man'? Brandon did not count the name 'Jesus' with the name 'Joshua' because Jesus was not the man Joshua (nor was Jesus any other man named Jesus). It's just not that hard to understand. The faith of a child can see it.
@4jgarner
4 ай бұрын
Any did we start out at Deuteronomy 16:11? Why not Genesis 16:11? Exodus? John? Revelation? Psalms? Could it be that he was cherry picking things that fit his numerological kJVO argument while ignoring passage that show the uselessness of this "hermeneutic", if it can even be called that.
@ScriptureHighlights-ee1tc
4 ай бұрын
Why aren't Messianic prophecies in every OT verse?
@4jgarner
4 ай бұрын
@@ScriptureHighlights-ee1tc in every verse? Because they aren't all prophetic? They aren't all about the Messiah? Is Deuteronomy about the 1611 KJV in some way that we should, in fact, go to it but not to Genesis or Exodus or the Gospel of John?
@ScriptureHighlights-ee1tc
4 ай бұрын
@@4jgarner If you studied Messianic prophecies, you would know that conservatively, there are about 300 Messianic prophecies in the Old Testament, even though others Christians have found close to 500 or so. Yes, Jesus basically said the Scriptures testify of Him (John 5:39), but are they all speaking clearly of His death, resurrection, and ministry? Even if you are not convinced by this argument, I will give you another example. Do all verses speak of the Trinity? I would say… “No.” There are certain truths that are specific at certain points in the Bible. The same is true with Biblical Numerics. Revelation 13:18 actually tells the person who already has wisdom to count the number of the beast (Which is the number of man). 2 Timothy 3:16 says all Scripture is profitable. So are not the numbers in the Bible profitable? Or do you think they are useless background noise or filler, or junk? God counts the stars, numbers the hairs on your head. There is even a book called Numbers in the Bible, and God tells the Israelites to count as a part of census. So if counting as a part of God’s ways are evil, then you would have to explain away these things. In other words, it’s like prayer. Prayer can be good, but there is also pagan or wrong way to pray. The same is true of numbers. One of the reasons for the existence of mathematical miracles in the KJV is to show that God’s Word is divine and holy. 2 Timothy 3:15 says the Scriptures are holy. Do you believe that? Yet, the Modern Bible Industrial Complex will tell you that all bibles are full of errors. This means that the Scriptures are not holy according to them. Who are you going to believe? God and His Word or the Modern day scribes? The choice is yours.
@burtwonderstone5315
4 ай бұрын
Great video. I noticed you tried a 2 camera approach on this, which seemed more distracting than helpful in this case. You didn't seem to know which camera to be looking at much of the time and it made it appear that you were constantly glancing away from the camera at something that was distracting you. I'd either lose a camera or stick to strictly looking at only one of them the whole time.
@pastorburris
4 ай бұрын
This is the first one I have done where I was using a computer and two cams. My wife agrees with you 😀
@burtwonderstone5315
4 ай бұрын
@@pastorburris That's alright. It's still great information!
@DansplainingTheBible
4 ай бұрын
@@pastorburrisa lot of people use 2 cameras and never look at the second one, only switching to the second camera now and then for a change of view or to mask cuts. I didn’t even notice until I saw the comment.
@pastorburris
4 ай бұрын
If you watch my videos, you will see that’s how I normally film.
@DansplainingTheBible
4 ай бұрын
@@pastorburrisI normally watch your videos (👍🏻), I just never noticed how many cameras you were using. 😬
@jasonwells5760
4 ай бұрын
I am a KJB guy and I recognize that there are many people who do not help the cause of King James Bible advocacy when they make false and foolish statements. For example, that the word "synagogues" is only found in the KJB in Psalm 74:8 (False: it's also used in the Spanish Bible of 1569, the Geneva Bible, and Almeida's Portuguese Bible of 1819.) Moreover, many KJVO folks automatically assume that just because a word or phrase is not the same in the modern versions as it appears in the KJB, then there must be a corruption. This is simply not true. For now two examples suffice: Daniel 11:38 and Acts 12:4.
@4jgarner
4 ай бұрын
Gosh you are great. A breath of fresh air!
@jasonwells5760
4 ай бұрын
@@4jgarnerThank you, but I'm not great.
@4jgarner
4 ай бұрын
@@jasonwells5760 in the broader context of this conversation, someone who prefers the KJV or maybe even is some sort of KJVO and is still willing to see bad arguments and say that they are bad like you did is great! O
@evanarmont
4 ай бұрын
I agree, KJV-onlyism only hurts the KJV
@jasonwells5760
4 ай бұрын
@@evanarmontI am King James only; I recognize that the modern versions do contain many readings that are factually and doctrinally wrong, but I also know that not every reading is wrong in the modern versions simply because they don't match the KJB word-for-word.
@milesmcloughlin1767
4 ай бұрын
You never have to apologize for going long!
@anthonykeve8894
Ай бұрын
In addition to confirmation bias this is nothing more than a demonstration of the extreme measures that some KJVOs will take/promote to rationalize their easily refutable beliefs. I feel very sorry that these wannabe Christians suffer from such incredibly weak Faith in Christ that they need a perfect translation as part of their salvation.
@johncosminsky5351
4 ай бұрын
Confirmation bias with extra steps
@billcovington5836
4 ай бұрын
1611 prophecy - scary
@jamation9X
4 ай бұрын
I've seen thumbnails of his videos before...I had a funny feeling those videos weren't truly objective but content for the sake of dogmatizing KJV Onlyism
@evanarmont
4 ай бұрын
Same here, I remember seeing a video titled "Jesus proves His deity with this number" and the thumbnail showed the number 70x7... Not sure how that would be even remotely connected to His deity
@ScriptureHighlights-ee1tc
4 ай бұрын
Brandon's presentation on the number 7 is one I would suggest if you are looking to have your mind blind (i.e., KJB superseded Hebrew and Greek). If after you see that and you still say, "No, I am not buying it," I would be in awe. In other words, there has to come a point where the patterns that keep repeating in ways they shouldn't cannot be mere random chance. No other book has the extreme level of numerics or mathematical miracles like the KJV. I challenge you or anyone here to bring evidence to show how another book can match the same level of numerics. I know you will not find any such book because the KJV is the Word of God. The Modern Bibles (while they can be helpful) also teach false doctrines (unlike the KJV). In any event, I hope this helps, and may God bless you.
@IsaacNelson54
10 күн бұрын
Matthew 12:37 For by thy words thou shalt be justified, and by thy words thou shalt be condemned.
@pastorburris
10 күн бұрын
What point are you trying to make?
@abcchristian5298
4 ай бұрын
Mark 9:29 And he said unto them, This kind can come forth by nothing, but by prayer and fasting.
@SherlockGnomes007
4 ай бұрын
Honestly it's hard NOT to be an "onlyist" if you believe that the Bible is not only divinely inspired but also perfectly preserved and infallible (neither of the latter ideas is clearly found in the Bible, oddly enough.) If Christians spent less time worrying about the absolute perfection of the Bible (which they should know by heart already, at least "the gist of it," regardless of translation), and more time worshipping God, imagine what they could accomplish!
@pastorburris
4 ай бұрын
It isn’t hard if you reject all of church history and the text of scripture itself and nearly 6000 Greek manuscripts and papyri fragments.
@SherlockGnomes007
4 ай бұрын
@@pastorburris So you're also an "onlyist?"
@peterhenderson7704
4 ай бұрын
This is a new one, haven't heard of this before. But it does remind me of the old Psalm 46 ploy. Count 46 from the start of the chapter and you find the word "shake", then 46 backwards from the end, and you find "spear". They say 1611 was the year Shakespeare turned 46... Never mind the spelling difference... I fail to see this as the fingerprints of the Holy Spirit, but more as the tampering of a egotistical editor, maybe? There is that old theory that the translators handed over the completed manuscript to Jimmy in 1609, and that he then handed it to his Lord Chancellor Sir Frederick Bacon, a Rosicrucian, with an interest in cryptography for editing... There is also a theory that Lord Bacon was in fact the true identity of Shakespeare? Whether that is true, will remain a mystery of history, but it is interesting that the letter "A"s seen on the woodcut prints in the original 1611, are also found in the original Shakespeare manuscripts... And this isn't the spookiest tid-bits to do with the 1611, but I'll save that for another time.
@joeywampler298
4 ай бұрын
So basically, you proved everything that Brandon said was true, you just didn't like how he came to that conclusion. Got it! Are you biased? The KJV was translated in 1611. And in a verse that is 16:11 you find the 1611th mentioning of the word "lord". Coincidence? Because of your bias, you refuse to give it any consideration. So, in your showing the different usages of the word "lord," it confirms your bias that the KJV is what you think it is not what Brandon thinks it is.
@pastorburris
4 ай бұрын
But the 1611 doesn’t provide the same results as the 1769 in the app 🤦♂️
@joeywampler298
4 ай бұрын
@@pastorburris irrelevant
@ScriptureHighlights-ee1tc
4 ай бұрын
@@pastorburris The 47 translators did not regather to recreate a radically different text for the 1769 KJV editions (Oxford and Cambridge). The big event is 1611 because that is when the translation was born. The 1769 is a minor update of the 1611 of the spelling, grammar, and in fixing printing errors.
@pastorburris
4 ай бұрын
How is it irrelevant? Then the NKJV differences should be irrelevant and you should accept it as a wonderful and faithful translation of the TR.
@pastorburris
4 ай бұрын
Define radically different? Is 2% radically different? Is 1.8%? What about 1.2%? The TR has over 1800 differences from the Byzantine Majority. Is that irrelevant?
@icanreadthebible7561
4 ай бұрын
One Lord, one Savior, one baptism. Why would it be difficult to believe God uses only one book?
@pastorburris
4 ай бұрын
Because only one of those things you mentioned did not exist until 1600 years after all the others. You really didn’t think that one through did you? 🤦♂️
@davidemme2344
4 ай бұрын
Which one? a copy of the septuigent? Masoretic Text? Or the earlier Dead Sea Scrolls? Who sets the standard? You? a 17th century Monarch?
@ScriptureHighlights-ee1tc
4 ай бұрын
The Book on the history of the Waldenses tells us that they gave the Reformers a pure Bible. It is the Latin Italic and this Bible (compilation of scrolls) goes back to the apostles. So before the KJV, it was the Latin Italic that went back to the apostles. “…the word of the Lord endureth for ever…” (1 Peter 1:25).
@4jgarner
4 ай бұрын
@@pastorburris not to mention, 3 of those were dictated in Scripture. The other was not.
@bigtobacco1098
4 ай бұрын
@@ScriptureHighlights-ee1tcyes... that passage was talking about the kjv... and are you claiming a baptist lineage ???
@alfredspeakup
4 ай бұрын
The king james bible is the real word of God!
@4jgarner
4 ай бұрын
Amen! So are the ESV, NIV, NASB, CSB etc
@classicchristianliterature
4 ай бұрын
Geneva bible only
@4jgarner
4 ай бұрын
@@classicchristianliterature finally. Someone waking up to the corruption of these modern translations.
@classicchristianliterature
4 ай бұрын
@@4jgarner lol
@mrmister6058
4 ай бұрын
Are we forwarding the gospel of Jesus? Are we forwarding the message? With all this fighting about translation?
@joshportie
4 ай бұрын
Anytime someone uses the term KJV onlyism or King James onlyism you know they have not looked into the topic. This goes for both sides.
@SEL65545
4 ай бұрын
I'm not sure why you're saying this. I know folks from both sides who use these terms who know an absolute ton about the topic.
@pastorburris
4 ай бұрын
Are you suggesting I haven’t looked into the topic? I have an entire playlist. It will sufficiently demonstrate that I have more than looked into it.
@thomaspower221
4 ай бұрын
I make it a practice, being obedient to the word, to NEVER discourage a brother in Christ to read the Bible. If more people were reading the Bible, like Brandon, the body of Christ would be edified. Furthermore, the faith that this young man has, in the Bible he is reading, seems to be authentic. I don't understand attacking someone for reading a Bible that is different than the one you read. What are we afraid of? There are over 100 translations in English. Read one of them for a while... see what the Holy Spirit tells you about it. I reference Mark 9:38-40 as an application. Leave Brandon alone...
@brothermike434
4 ай бұрын
Brandon doesn’t appear to be so much studying the Bible as he is counting words. Jesus and the Apostles never instructed us to count words to reveal hidden meanings. Furthermore, his youthful energy and exuberance could be better spent sharing the Gospel and making disciples.
@classicchristianliterature
4 ай бұрын
Posting videos and teaching others makes you accountable to critique
@carolbarlow8896
4 ай бұрын
You “don’t understand” why Brandon attacking us for reading the Bible, just not his Bible, is wrong? 🤔
@MAMoreno
4 ай бұрын
@@brothermike434 KJV Only people *do* study the Bible, but they tend to study it in the most fruitless ways possible. (I say that as a former KJVO.)
@brothermike434
4 ай бұрын
@@MAMoreno Agreed. What was the determining factor that brought you out of KJVO and which translation are you reading/studying now? Blessings
@ScriptureHighlights-ee1tc
4 ай бұрын
@PastorBurris Greetings to you in the name of Jesus Christ. I have been watching a lot of Nick Sayers videos, and he has a lot of good information defending the KJV and TR. In Nick’s video I watched yesterday, he stated he is not into biblical numerics, and I can respect that. I realize that even KJV / TR believers are not in favor of looking at biblical numerics. Anyway, to get down to the topic of your video: #1. Brandon is not wrong on the 1611th mention of LORD / Lord in his video. I just watched the video again. Brandon tells you straight out if you count both LORD (Jehovah) or Lord (Adonai - meaning master), you will land in Deuteronomy 1611 at the 1611th mention of LORD / Lord. You have to realize that Jesus is both God and man. Revelation says Jesus is the King of Kings and Lord of Lords. Also, Jesus who is God is one with the Father. Note: Nick Sayers has a really good apologetics on why Yahweh is a reference to the god of Jupiter. So Jehovah is the proper rendering in English for the sacred name of God (all upper-cased LORD) in the Bible. #2. You point out that the 7th mention of LORD just counting within Deuteronomy 16:11 should be a 1769 numerical pattern and not 1611 seeing this pattern is not present in the 1611 edition but the 1769 one. Well, the 1769 edition is not a radically different version or edition of the 1611 when it comes to content or meaning (involving the understanding of the words). In fact, the 1769 is the 1611, but it is merely standardized involving the grammar, spelling, and with it fixing printing errors. There are no substantive changes. Even if you believed there were, they would be so small and insignificant, especially in light of the intentional changes found in Modern Bibles that began with Westcott, Hort, and George Vance Smith (a Unitarian). Note: George Vance Smith worked on the Revised Version with Westcott and Hort, and he wrote a book that highlights the changed doctrines (i.e., Texts and Margins of the Revised New Testament). Anyway, the point you're missing is that the 1769 is the 1611 in content. The 1769 Cambridge/Oxford Blayney or the Pure Cambridge KJV editions are the three KJV editions that are most widely in use by the church today and they reflect the Holy Scriptures of the 1611 KJV. Rarely do people use an actual 1611 seeing that the font is all different and it has the Apocrypha in it. #3. You basically said Brandon was employing bad hermeneutics in the examples given. I do not agree. Why? Well, let me ask you a question: Are there things in the Bible that go beyond the immediate context? Yes, there are. There are things called Messianic prophecies and types of Christ. Messianic prophecies and typifications of Christ in the stories of the Old Testament do not directly refer to Christ in the immediate context of the OT event or story. Yet, nevertheless, they can have another meaning that points ahead to Jesus Christ. Jesus even said, “Search the scriptures; for in them ye think ye have eternal life: and they are they which testify of me.” (John 5:39). Brandon mentions 70 x 7 mentions of Jesus (When it refers to the Son of God). 70 x 7 is how many times Jesus told us to forgive. Is it not odd that the name of Jesus appears 70 x 7 times each in both the odd and even books of the New Testament? What are the chances of this happening? This again is not a random equation, either. Jesus told us to forgive this many times. How do you not see the miraculous nature of something like this? Side Note: By the way, there are so many more amazing things like this, as well. These patterns should not appear on such an extreme level in one book. If you find another book that matches up in the same level of numerical patterns as the KJV as Brandon pointed out, then you need to bring forth that evidence. I believe Biblical Numerics are examples of how Scripture is miraculous. They are like tiny little miracles because they could not be the result of random chance. In Jesus’ ministry, some did not believe Jesus’ miracles. I see that this is the same today involving the miracles of His Word. One cannot believe because they have a bias to Modern Textual Criticism, and the Critical Text, etcetera. #4. 1611 also appears in other verses of the Bible. 1611 is tied to the truth found in Scripture that states man shall not live by bread alone, but by every Word of God. If you were to arrange the verse numbers vertically, in order to perform traditional addition involving the numbers found in verses Deuteronomy 8:3, Matthew 4:4, and Luke 4:4, you would get a total of 1611. (Side Note: the Critical Text advocates do not believe in living by every Word of God because it keeps shape shifting and changing all the time). In addition, there is Acts 1611. Brandon has a video on Acts 1611, if you are interested. Even if you did not agree with those points involving the 1611, I would recommend Brandon’s presentation on how the KJB supersedes Hebrew and Greek. Granted, it's information overload and you should probably take notes. However, there has to come a point where these patterns can no longer be merely a coincidence anymore. In other words, it's the hand of God preserving His own Word. In any event, whether you agree or disagree, may the Lord Jesus bless you and your family.
@pastorburris
4 ай бұрын
1. You are incorrect. You must include “lord”, lowercase, that is neither YHWH nor adoni to get to the 1611th occurrence in Deuteronomy 16:11. I demonstrate that in my video.
@jsko82
4 ай бұрын
What if God has coded his message in KJV but also in English language?: With square values like a=1x1, b=2x2, c=3x3, ... and z=26x26 you will get value of 1611 from words "The Book of Life" . With nine times (1+6+1+1 = 9 = 3x3) reverse letter values like a=9, b=18, c=27, ... and z=234 you will get value of 1611 from words "The Book of the LORD". With nine times (1+6+1+1 = 9 = 3x3) reverse letter values like a=9, b=18, c=27, ... and z=234 you will get value of 1611 from words "Holy King James Bible". Reverse extended letter values like z=1, y=2, x=3,... r=9, q=10, p=20, ..., i=90, h=100, g=200, ... and a=800. You will get value of 1611 from words "Sword of God" . Value of words "Holy Bible King James Authorized Version" with three times (trinity) reverse letter values like z=3, y=6, x=9, ... and a=78. You will get value of 1611. Value of words "King James Bible" with three times (trinity) reverse letter values like z=3, y=6, x=9, ... and a=78. You will get value of 777. and much more... And maybe God has coded some message in Latin language too?: Value of words "Sanctus Rex Iacobus Bible Auctoritate Version" (= "Holy King James Authorized Version") with ordinal prime number letter values like a=2, b=3, c=5, ..., z=101. You will get value 2 x 777. Are all these (and many others) just imagination and coincidence or is God showing that he is THE KING OF KINGS AND LORD of LORDS. He has created the whole universe. Would he be able to inspire one perfect book for us?
@jonathanchaney5896
4 ай бұрын
Where in scripture are we told to search for codes? No where. Jesus said “have you not read what God spoke to you.” We’re called to believe on the word of God, not look for some code to verify it. Honestly, that’s just a superstition like a person who seeks a sign in something around them as some sort of answer from God.
@jsko82
4 ай бұрын
Jesus is the Word of the LORD. He was born in year 0. Every new year is his birthday. He changed a lot from baby to grown adult. He was still the same Jesus, but older and taller. Baby Jesus and adult Jesus are different from outside but Jesus did have the same DNA (=information) all the time. Same can be compared with KJV 1611 and 1769 editions. If those would be different Bibles, they should have different names and different information. But this is not the case with KJV.
@pastorburris
4 ай бұрын
Jesus was not born in year 0.
@jsko82
4 ай бұрын
@@pastorburrisThat wasn't even my point. My point was that Jesus do have a birthday year and so does KJV.
@jonathanchaney5896
4 ай бұрын
Cambridge vs. Oxford. They are different. But, even going with your argument, if the code verifies the 1769. That also means that the 1611 was not verified and wasn’t until 1769. So your own argument shows the KJV fails these tests until the Blaney revision. Besides all of that, none of these codes proves the KJV is the only pure word of God.
@jsko82
4 ай бұрын
@@jonathanchaney5896 They both have exactly 7^7 words. Search "Elton Anomaly" and check the video (from 1:10:20). First and last verses' first and last words are mentioned 77777* times in KJB. (*when last words are case-sensitive: "earth" and "Amen"). Also the first and last words ("In" and "Amen") from KJB are mentioned 777* times in Genesis and Revelation (word "Amen" with case-sensitive). Check it yourself with Pure King James Bible Search.
@jsko82
4 ай бұрын
@PastorBurris, ain't you make rules how to count "Lord" words? Who is the right author to make rules? If you see a miracle, are you just ruining it with own explanations or praising the LORD for it? Btw. there is 777 mentions of words JESUS/Jesus (without any punctuations attached) in KJV. Also KJV has exactly 7^7 words as it is presented in Brandon's new video (Elton's anomaly). There is enough light for those who want to believe and enough darkness for those who don't. I really recommend you to continue to watch more Brandon's videos so that you can estimate how likely his discoveries are just random...
@pastorburris
4 ай бұрын
Does Brandon get to make the rules? Is he the author? Watch his videos. He does that all the time. Your Jesus example refutes your first question. 🤦♂️ don’t you have to exclude the mistranslations of Jesus/Joshua in the KJV? Do these same rules apply to other editions of the KJV or only the 1769 Cambridge? That answer will tell you that all KJVs are not the same and they cannot all be perfect. Things that are different are not the same. Which one single edition is perfect?
@ScriptureHighlights-ee1tc
4 ай бұрын
@@pastorburris Just go to Brandon's site and you will see the 777 patterns. This is tied to the Trinity in ways that should not be possible be random chance. Anyway, one will either believe the miracles or they will not believe them.
@jsko82
4 ай бұрын
@pastorburris: No, Brandon is not making the rules. He is just presenting patterns from KJV which he has found. In you video you make your own rules, how those "LORD" words should be found from KJV, so that it would matters to you. Is it an objective viewpoint from it? Btw. 1611th "LORD" word can be found from Deut.16:11 verse from year 1611 KJV Bible also.
@jsko82
4 ай бұрын
With hundreds of different patterns from KJV Brandon is showing who is the real author that make the rules.
Пікірлер: 284