@JD731 was asking if you believe in verbal plenary God breathed written word of God?
See:
KJVO is alive and well here at the BB
		 
		
	 
Who sent him?
All he needs to worry about is;
Critical View:
1. Scripture is like any text of human origin.
2. Approach Scripture like any other text.
3. The subjective judgment of the individual critic is 
the ultimate criterion for determining the Scripture 
text, to be applied through the methods of intrinsic and 
transcriptional probability. 
4. The older the manuscript, the better its text. 
5. The quality of a manuscript is determined by its 
genealogy. 
6. The number of manuscripts is not a criterion for 
determining the quality of a text. 
7. The traditional majority text is the result of conflation 
(the mixing of two or more texts). 
8. The Traditional Text is the result of at least two 
deliberate revisions. 
9. Cureton’s Syriac is the only surviving specimen of the 
unrevised version.
10. The critical minority text is the purest.
Traditional view:
1. Scripture is the unique Word of God.
2. Scripture requires its own special approach.
3. The Scripture text is to be established on the basis 
of all the available textual evidence by applying all the 
relevant textual principles, at least the ‘seven notes of 
truth’ (defined by John Burgon in Burgon 1896a. 
4. The age of a manuscript is a necessary but not 
sufficient criterion for determining the quality of its 
text, even less an absolute one. 
For the New Testament text, age is also inadequate 
in that some of its earliest manuscripts 
are among the most corrupted ones, so 
that an older witness is not necessarily better. 
Moreover, the oldest uncials33 *
adduced to support the Critical Text 
are not the oldest extant manuscripts. 
5. Genealogy is an inadequate principle, insufficient in 
and of itself. 
Drawn as it is from familial relationships, 
the textual analogy is flawed. 
As the precise relationships between most extant New Testament 
manuscripts are unknown, this principle is inapplicable. 
6. Insufficient in and of itself, the number of 
manuscripts is one of several textual criteria necessary 
for determining the providentially preserved text. 
The normal laws of evidence require it. 
Hort is contradicting himself. 
7. There is no sufficient and unambiguous historical 
evidence to support any conflation, much less wholesale 
conflation, of the Traditional Text. 
Omission in the Critical Text is more plausible. 
8. That there were the two revisions supposed by Hort 
is pure conjecture. 
This view is not supported either by 
external evidence of the existence of church councils on 
such revisions, or of any documents relating to major 
Bible revisions produced by such councils. 
9. This critical assumption is pure hypothesis, 
unsupported by historical or textual evidence.
10. The traditional majority text is the purest.
* ‘Uncials’ are European manuscripts of the 4th-8th 
centuries written in a majuscule script with rounded unjoined 
letters, from which modern capital letters are derived.