If you make any exclusive only claim for one English Bible translation--the KJV, that is what constitutes a KJV-only view.
Thank you, for your accusation, but I believe your KJV-only obsession is too extreme a religion for me to be bored with.
If you consider the KJV to be the word of God translated into English in a different sense than the pre-1611 English Bibles are the word of God translated into English and than the post-1611 English Bibles such as the NKJV are the word of God translated into English, that would indicate KJV-only opinions.
Thank you, again, for your religion of obsessing with KJV-onlyism.
The NKJV was translated into English using some different underlying text, wasn't it?
"To the contrary, our study leads us to conclude that the NKJV vitiates the original, reliable, accurate KJV in a most deceptive manner. While claiming to have "preserved the authority and accuracy" of the original KJV, the actual result is a hybrid text which incorporates many changes identical with or similar to the c*********s found in other modern Bible versions..."
One instance; "A striking word change involves changing
"corrupt" to "peddling" in
2 Corinthians 2:17. The KJV correctly says,
"For we are not as many, which corrupt the Word of God...."
"But the NKJV....
(and other sister versions) change
"corrupt" to "peddling."
"Is there any great difference between peddling (selling, or making a gain of) the Word of God and c********g (adulterating) it?
"Of course there is, and one does not have to be a Greek scholar to decide which word is correct. When this warning was given in the 1st Century, was there any way for people to peddle (make a gain of) God's Word?
"Of course, not-they were suffering for it.
"The warning clearly refers to corrupting God's Word, something that was common then as it is now.
"Only in our day has it ever been possible to peddle (make a gain of) the Bible. With its huge profits from the sale of many different Bible versions, the Thomas Nelson Publishers is both corrupting and peddling God's Word."
(this may be from a KJV-only site, dunno, I'm just making a citation of good info/ try to contain yourself; The NKJV Examined).
While the pre-1611 English Bibles used those closer to the Original Autographs(?) Right?
The wisdom from God above does not show partiality (
James 3:17) to one exclusive group of Church of England critics in 1611.
Wow. What about that? Thanks again, man.
as is available to post-1611 English Bible translators if they are believers.
"if they are believers", would be nice, as well as using sufficient texts and copacetic translation techniques and procedures.
...
So, I may have a hard time keeping pace with your all's impugning of one of the greatest books ever published because that's not my forte or calling for that matter.
It does appear to have been the forte and calling of Fenton John Anthony Hort, however.
He and Brook Foss Westcott revised and replaced the Greek text of the New Testament, as you may know, although as "a group of former Jehovah's Witnesses, Mormons, and Secularists sharing various facts that they have learned over the years" have to say of them at;
https://www.bibleready.org/westcott-and-hort;
"Clearly, Wescott and Hort were Occult practitioners during the time that they were revising the Greek Text of the New Testament.
"Their Master Greek text of 1881 has become the "textus receptus" of the modern translations today with most people completely unaware of the historical occult connection."
However, these examples of Hort's contempt and deep repugnance for the
Textus Receptus used for the KJV, maybe more to your taste and liking, as bashing efforts;
"In a private letter dated 1851, Mr. Hort betrayed his hatred toward the revered Textus Receptus when he wrote:
"I had no idea until the last few weeks of the importance of texts having read so little Greek Testament and dragged on with
the villainous Textus Receptus.
"Think of
that vile Textus Receptus leaning entirely on late manuscripts."
"Thus at only twenty-three years of age and having admitted to reading little of the Greek Testament,
Hort concluded that the Textus Receptus was "vile" and "villainous."
"The more a person researches Mr. Hort, the more that an image emerges of him as a misfit with an axe to grind.
"Never mind that this master Greek text had withstood the test of time and the scrutiny of a vast array of biblical language scholars far superior to him for the previous two and a half centuries;
"never mind that it was in near-perfect agreement with over 99% of all known Greek manuscripts.
"This 23 yr. student
knew that it was vile and
spent the rest of his life trying to prove it.
"He is said to have died an early death from "mental exhaustion".
"There is no peace, saith the LORD, unto the wicked." - Isaiah 48:22"
