Search results

There are different kinds or classes of Qere/Kethib readings in the Hebrew Masoretic text. Concerning Qere/Ketiv notes, Israel Yeivin referred to “15 cases of one written word read as two” and “8 cases where two written words are read as one” (Introduction, p. 57). Elias Levita as translated by...

Concerning this Second Rabbinic Bible edited by Jacob ben Chayyim, Israel Yeivin (1923-2008) as translated by E. J. [Ernest John] Revell (1934-2017) wrote: “It is now been shown however, that although this edition is quite close to the original ben Asher tradition, it in fact represents a...

You seem to close your eyes to the clear verifiable facts that prove that the Hebrew Masoretic text was not perfectly preserved or kept by the Jews. Your seeming attempts to avoid or deny actual verifiable facts will not make them go away. Three whole Old Testament verses [Joshua 21:36-37...

The existing Hebrew Old Testament is not an every letter, every word perfect stable text. For the Old Testament text, the KJV is based on this Hebrew Masoretic text imperfectly kept by the Jews. There are three Old Testament verses [Joshua 21:36-37; Nehemiah 7:68] that would prove that the...

B. Barry Levy asserted: “The popular assumption that no changes were ever introduced into copies of the Bible during rabbinic times or under rabbinic auspices simply does not accord with the facts” (Fixing God’s Torah: The Accuracy of the Hebrew Bible Text in Jewish Law, p. 4). Barry Levy...

The 2026 The Ancient Standard Bible edited by Tyler Holliday indicates that it has the English New Testament by Robert Adam Boyd. Alan Dale Gross, would you advocate or recommend this Bible with Robert Adam Boyd's English New Testament as being the word of God translated into English in the...

I have a copy of 2021 The Text-Critical English New Testament [Byzantine Text Version] translated and compiled by Robert Adam Boyd. Alan Dale Gross, are you advocating or recommending Robert Adam Boyd's English New Testament as being the word of God translated into English in the same sense...

I did not claim that all English Bible are translated in the exact same sense (unequivocally) as you incorrectly suggest. I have not advocated nor recommended the Critical Text nor any English Bible translations made from it so you should know that I do not accept and recommend all English...

I do not find that you and Anthony Pritchard actually disagree with essential aspects of KJV-only reasoning/teaching. You seem to hold to an incorrect definition and understanding of what constitutes KJV-only reasoning. You may try to suggest that the term KJV-only applies only to the views of...

Since one animal [the reem] had two horns according to scripture, it was not an unicorn [an one-horned animal] according to common sense. The context of the verse in Deuteronomy clearly supports the view that this animal had more than one horn. In the context, the “them” of this verse refers...

Two lines of Bibles [one line claimed to be preserved and one claimed to be reconstructed and not preserved] or two streams of Bibles would be a leading KJV-only argument. KJV-only reasoning appeals to the same preserved line [Wycliffe, Tyndale, Coverdale, Geneva, Bishops, and the 1611 KJV] so...

You claim a distinction that you do not prove to be true and that you do not apply consistently and justly to your own claimed preserved line [Wycliffe, Coverdale, Matthew’s, Great Bible, Geneva, Bishops, 1611 KJV]. Are your eyes closed to seeing examples of reconstruction in your preserved...

You would seem to be guilty of what you accuse others as you reframed their and my position into something they and I did not say. You have not engaged with what I actually asserted so you do not practice what you preach. I have responded directly to your very own assertions that I quoted and...

You misunderstand and misrepresent the teaching of Bible believers who disagree with modern, non-scriptural KJV-only reasoning/teaching. You seem to try to create a strawman misrepresentation to knock down rather than providing sound, verifiable facts from your claimed preserved line to back up...

Your preserved line does not preserve the Scriptures in the original languages to the level of spelling and number. Here is an example of where the KJV does not preserve the number [singular/plural] in the Hebrew Masoretic text. Likely following the Greek Septuagint or Jerome’s Latin Vulgate...

You make the claims, but you fail to prove them to be true. Your claims are unproven since you have failed to demonstrate "continuity of meaning and doctrinal content" in what you claim to be the preserved line: Wycliffe, Coverdale, Matthew’s, Great Bible, Geneva, Bishops, 1611 KJV. Have you...

Yes, I accept what is stated and taught in 2 Timothy 3:16. According to the Scriptures themselves, it could be soundly concluded that inspiration would be a term for the way, method, means, or process by which God directly gave the Scriptures to the prophets and apostles or for the way that the...

You can repeat your unproven claims, but your statements are factually not true. Verifiable facts from the pre-1611 English Bibles refuted your claims, showing that they differ more than just in spelling and minor phrasing. They do not all transmit the same exact received text. The 1380's...

You jump to wrong conclusions with your strawman assumptions, or you make false claims since I accept the Bible's doctrines of inspiration and preservation. I do not claim that Scripture is "a fluid text" as you falsely allege. I present actual verifiable facts from the English Bibles that...

You are somewhat uninformed or misinformed since all the Bibles [Wycliffe, Coverdale, Matthew’s, Great Bible, Geneva, Bishops, 1611 KJV] do not share the same underlying preserved text. The 1380's Wycliffe's Bible was based on editions of Jerome's Latin Vulgate, which is not the same as the...