Search results

The poster in his title and in the opening post referred to the Bible translation that he holds in his hands [which would be the KJV] as inspired. Claiming that a Bible translation [the KJV] is given by inspiration of God would constitute KJV-only reasoning. Alan Dale Gross wrote: "By that I...

KJV-only author William Grady wrote: “God the Holy Ghost has already spent 3,500 years displaying His willingness to empower both His written and printed Scripture—despite whatever degree of human deficiencies may have accompanied the process” (Given By Inspiration, p. 277). Does William Grady’s...

I read what you wrote. Perhaps you did not read carefully what I wrote. You seem to read what I post through a different lens than how I wrote it. I did not claim that you were KJV-only. The opening post in this thread is advocating a typical KJV-only claim that suggests that the KJV is...

At Judges 10:4, James D. Price maintained that the Masoretic Text “reads ‘they had thirty donkeys,’ whereas the King James Version reads ‘they had thirty cities,’ following the Aramaic Targum and the other ancient versions” (King James Onlyism, p. 284). James D. Price suggested that “apparently...

Believers who disagree with non-scriptural KJV-only reasoning are not limiting the power of the LORD. It is erroneous KJV-only reasoning/teaching that seems to try to limit the word of God and the power of God to the textual criticism decisions, Bible revision decisions, and translation...

In the 2026 book entitled God's Word Is Not Bound: Copyright & the Stewardship of Scripture, Andrew Case wrote: "The right to print the Authorized Version was governed by the royal printing prerogative, commonly attacked in the nineteenth century as the 'Bible monopoly,' which was established...

In order to try to justify their claims that the KJV is inspired, do some KJV-only advocates also attempt to interpret some possible figures of speech such as personification concerning Scripture or the word of God literally? If a figure of speech is understood and interpreted literally, it can...

In my opinion, the demonstrated inconsistencies in Anthony Pritchard's claims and his own assertion suggesting that my points or arguments and Glenn Conjurske's points and arguments for a preserved Traditional text view have supposedly failed would lead to the logical conclusion that he is...

Perhaps it has never occurred to some KJV-only advocates that their definition, understanding, and interpretation of the term inspiration and of the term Scripture may not be sound or perfect. What is their clear, precise, sound definition and understanding of inspiration that can be applied...

Three Old Testament verses [Joshua 21:36-37; Nehemiah 7:68] are not in the text of Ben Chayyim’s Hebrew Masoretic Text edition, showing that the Masoretes did not preserve the text perfectly in all the Hebrew manuscripts they copied. J. Scott Porter maintained that “it [Joshua 21:36-37] is...

Are you indicating that you agree with Peter Ruckman's definition? Peter Ruckman wrote: “If it is ‘SCRIPTURE,’ God gave it; if God gave it, the method He used was by inspiration” (Biblical Scholarship, p. 355). Peter Ruckman asserted that “given by inspiration of God” “is the definition of...

Benjamin Kennicott asserted: “This evidence of the Keri [Qere] has sorely distressed the advocates of the perfection of the Hebrew text, who would fain have the Keri called conjectures, or expositions, or explanations, or any thing, rather than various readings” (State, II, p. 281). Benjamin...

Your belief in your interpretation does not make it true and scriptural. This verse in the third chapter of 2 Timothy does not actually assert nor infer that there is a giving or re-giving of the Scriptures by inspiration of God each time it was copied or each time it was translated into a...

You are reading "the KJV" or Bible translations into the term "Scripture" at 2 Timothy 3:16. The KJV itself in its rendering of 2 Timothy 3:16 suggests that the term inspiration concerns the process of the giving of all Scripture to the prophets and apostles, but the KJV does not assert that...

Your argument was answered by demonstrating your misrepresentation of Glenn Conjurske's point. You change the subject away from the point that he was making. Glenn Conjurske soundly demonstrated the inconsistency and flaw in KJV-only claims about marginal notes and variant readings while you...

The real flaw is that you misrepresent Glenn Conjurske's point. Glenn Conjurske was applying the argument of KJV-only advocates concerning textual variants or marginal notes consistently and justly. Glenn Conjurske noted: "The King James Only people roundly condemn the modern translators...

I do not attempt to force you into a KJV-only category. I would hope that you choose not to use erroneous KJV-only arguments. You yourself seemed to group or categorize Traditional Text, Textus Receptus, and KJV all together as part of one of two options or possibilities until I pointed out...

Anthony Pritchard, do you claim the entire or whole Critical Text is reconstructed? What is your definition of the term reconstructed in relationship to the text of the New Testament? If your term reconstructed does not concern the whole or entire Critical text, what portion, part, or...

Do you claim the entire or whole Critical Text is reconstructed? If your term reconstructed does not concern the whole or entire Critical text, what portion, part, or percentage of the Critical Text do you claim to be reconstructed? What portion, part, or percentage of a text has to have been...

What source indicates that about one fourth of the KJV translators were favorable towards the Puritans? Are the specific names of around one fourth of the KJV translators presented and listed or was this perhaps a guess or rough estimate? Miles Smith is sometimes suggested to have been...