At the Sword Scripture Conference, Pastor_Bob reported that "Dr. Norris Belcher spoke on "Staying with the Word of God." His text was Luke 20:45-47 He poses the question - If you were Satan, would you not do everything in your power to weaken the Word of God and then convince people that it was indeed the pure Word of God? [It stands to reason that Satan has produced counterfeits of everything that God made pure and holy. Why would the Word of God be any different? If Satan did produce a counterfeit Bible, where is it today?] Dr. Belcher then offered some examples of differences in the two texts: Mark 1:1-3 - The KJV reads "prophets" whereas the CT reads "The prophet Isaiah." He points out that Jesus was quoting two prophets not just the prophet Isaiah." _______________________________________ I have not recommended the Criticial Text, nor any English translations made from it. To be fair to them, it should be acknowledged that the reading "Isaiah the prophet" at Mark 1:2 is also found in some Bibles that are placed on the KJV-only view's line or stream of the preserved text. Murdock's and Lamsa's English translations of the Syriac Peshitta, which is on the KJV-only view line or stream of good Bibles, have "Isaiah the prophet" at Mark 1:2. Dean Burgon also acknowledged that the Old Latin Version had the name of Isaiah at Mark 1:2 and that “copies of the Old Latin version thrust Isaiah’s name into Matthew 1:22, and Zechariah’s name into 21:4” (Unholy Hands, I, pp. B-53-B-54). The Old Latin Bibles are also placed on the KJV-only view's line or stream of the preserved text. Wycliffe's Bible, which is on the KJV-only view's line or stream of good Bibles according to several KJV-only authors, also has "Isaiah the prophet" at Mark 1:2. Why are KJV-only authors willing to accept some Bibles that have this reading "Isaiah the prophet" at Mark 1:2 while rejecting others?