Search results

Your argument is inconsistent and flawed. You did not prove that Glenn Conjurske argument was flawed. Glenn Conjurske did not assert that the presence of Qere and Kethib contradict preservation as you try to put words in his mouth that he did not say. You seem to ignore the fact that there...

As already pointed out more than once, that alone does not remove you from the category of KJV-only. You demonstrate again that you evidently have a wrong definition and understanding of the term KJV-only. Accepting the validity of preserved-text translations in other languages does not prove...

Does the textual criticism method of Erasmus represent a reconstructionist philosophy? Jan Krans wrote: “In the preface of the Annotations, Erasmus describes the basic text-critical task as follows: ‘if I found something damaged by carelessness or ignorance of scribes or by the injuries of...

Have you approved, recommended, or advocated any English Bible translations based on the Byzantine/Majority textform? Acknowledging their existence does not indicate any acceptance or approval of them. Would your use of a KJV-only-type linguistic argument suggesting that Modern English is...

Have you approved, recommended, or advocated any English Bible translations based on the Byzantine/Majority textform? Acknowledging their existence does not indicate any acceptance or approval of them. Would your use of a KJV-only-type linguistic argument for archaic Early Modern English and...

The preserved stream argument is a typical KJV-only argument. After referring to “the overwhelming evidence of the two routes in textual history,” H. D. Williams asserted: “One route is like a river and wherever you sample along the river, the many samples are the same, whether it is the...

Is the claim of a completely separate pure preserved stream or river made and repeated without evidence, making it a fable? Is there overwhelming evidence of two completely separate streams in textual history? Is preserved text your repeated category assignment that you present without the...

[Bold type added by this poster to point out the specific aspects of your post to which I am responding.] Where does John William Burgon refer to a "preserved stream"? John William Burgon did not use a "stream" argument concerning preservation. Where did Pickering use a "stream" argument...

My position would seem to be much closer to that of John William Burgon's than Anthony Pritchard's is. Has it become clear that my position is closer to a Traditional Text view than his inconsistent preserved text view seems to be? Instead of his repeated two options: "Preserved vs...

Has it now become clear that my position is closer to that of John William Burgon's than Anthony Pritchard's is? Has it become clear that my position is closer to a Traditional Text view than his vague preserved text view is? A preserved text argument is the KJV-only view's argument. In his...

Are you running away after your inconsistencies were exposed? You have not exposed any failed arguments on my part so your assertion is not true. You do not engage in meaningful serious discussion. Your incorrect repeated "quote-stacking" allegation to divert from the evidence was not...

This discourse has exposed your failed arguments. You have not refuted my sound observations. You failed to engage in serious, meaningful discussion.

Here is one of your own posts where you presented two positions or two choices. You have not been consistent. Four possible varying texts on which Bible translations could be made exist while you presented only two in more than one post. Traditional Text or Byzantine Majority Text, Textus...

In more than one post, you limited it to two positions: Traditional Text vs Critical Text. You have not been consistent. I have not asserted that you claim the label KJV-only. I have soundly demonstrated your use of KJV-only arguments. When you display KJV-only reasoning in your posts, I...

You are contradicting what you posted in some posts. In several posts, you limited the choices to two: Traditional Text vs Critical Text.

Your claim that there are only two choices is your subjective assertion, but you have not demonstrated that there are only two. There would be at least three or four positions and perhaps more while you seem to use the fallacy of false dilemma to try to limit it to two. Typical KJV-only...

The documented evidence presented is stronger than your unsupported opinions and your use of fallacies such as the fallacy of false dilemma. You try to dismiss sound reasoning so you can cling to your unsound reasoning. There would be at least three or four positions and perhaps more while...

That is your incorrect opinion. You have repeatedly used KJV-only arguments in your stated reasoning. The KJV-only view depends upon a preserved stream of manuscripts/Bibles argument. Your basic argument that you have presented is a KJV-only argument. You continue to misrepresent the...

You fail to practice what you preach. You have not presented a clear line of thought. You have not provided historical witnesses and verifiable facts that confirm and prove your inconsistent KJV-only reasoning to be correct. You simply assert and declare your claims without meeting your...

Your unbacked position seems to be simple--make unproven assumptions, provide no proof, use fallacies to beg the question and to try to reverse the burden of proof, and refuse to engage in serious discussion. Your claims are not supported by consistent textual data.