From which specific absolutely pure, perfect copies of Scripture was KJV translated?

Discussion in 'Bible Versions/Translations' started by Logos1560, Jan 3, 2016.

  1. Logos1560

    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Oct 22, 2004
    Likes Received:
    KJV-only author Al Lacy asserted: "From God's pure manuscripts came the AV1611" (Can I Trust My Bible, p. 18).

    KJV-only author David W. Daniels claimed that the KJV “was accurately translated from perfect copies of God’s words” (BattleC ry, Sept/Oct., 2007, p. 11).

    KJV-only pastor Raymond Blainton asserted: “It is essential, however, that the manuscripts to be translated are indeed the inspired words of God” (The Perilous Times, June, 2000, p. 5).

    KJV-only author H. Wayne Williams asserted: "There are many infallible manuscripts such as the Majority Text and the Textus Receptus to verify the preserved Scripture" (Does God Have a Controversy, p. 21).

    KJV-only author E. W. Whitten claimed: “The manuscripts from which the translations are made must first be true and accurate” (Truth, p. 127).

    KJV-only author Joe Gresham maintained that “no translation of the Bible is any better than the manuscripts from which it is translated” and that “if a person has a Bible translated from corrupted manuscripts, they have a corrupted Bible“ (Dealing, p. 28).

    KJV-only advocate John Phillips claimed: "The King James translators did not use a 'choose and reject' system; that is, take manuscripts or texts which contained both good and bad" (The King James Contender, April, 1980, p. 2).

    John Cereghin, a defender of the KJV, admitted: "If the Greek is faulty, how can the English, which is translated from that Greek, be pure?" (MBBC Swordsman, Winter, 1994, p. 7).

    John Cereghin wrote: "If these Greek and Hebrew manuscripts are corrupt, then the Authorized Version must also be corrupt" (Maranatha Baptist Watchman, May, 1998,

    KJV-only advocate Kent Rabe declared: "A corrupt text cannot produce a good Bible, and a good text cannot produce a bad Bible" (Double Exposure, p. 14).

    In his commentary on the Psalms, Peter Ruckman wrote: “A pure Bible couldn’t come from an impure source” (II, p. 979).

    Was the KJV a revision of perfect, pure pre-1611 English Bibles?

    From which specific, absolutely pure, perfect, infallible copies of Scripture was the 1611 KJV translated if it was actually translated from such copies?
  2. annsni

    Expand Collapse

    May 30, 2006
    Likes Received:
    In other words, which manuscript is an exact, perfect copy of the KJV? I'd love to get the answer from any of those authors - which manuscript/s exactly match the KJV in total - not in a word here or a word there but if the manuscript is perfect, pure and infallible, then we should see exactness between the KJV and that manuscript in ALL verses.

Share This Page