All fundamentalists of various denominations held that the Bible was inerrant, infallible and perfectly inspired IN THE ORIGINALS. This is the first of the 13 original fundamentals, and oft repeated. Until 1970 99.99% of anyone claiming to be a "fundamentalist" would agree with this. Only a rare bird would say that a particular English translation was perfectly inspired, except as derived (accurately translated from the originals). Then came the rise of a sect called the "onlies". They insist that only (hence the name) the AV1611 was inspired, only the underlying Greek text of the AV1611 was inspired, and that any perceived "error" was just advanced revelation. A church in Colorado Springs was hosting a conference on the fundamentals of the faith a few years back. In their literature, they said that a NEW FUNDAMENTAL - perfectly preserved and inspired Word of God was ONLY in the KJV (not sure which revision was the correct one). And that a person was NOT a "fundamentalist" if they did not thus believe. My point for discussion would be that, by definition, such a KJVOnly sect position would preclude a person as NOT an HISTORIC FUNDAMENTALIST. Floor is yours. I'm on vacation!