I saw this quote in another thread and to be quite honest I was bothered by it. It claims that the KJV is not just a translation of the TR, but an actual variety of it. Its sounds like that would attempt to equate it with Erasmus, Stephanus, et al. There are many who say they are not KJVO, but TRO. Does this concept not give ground for one to say he is TRO, perhaps because that is more acceptable, while in essence he truly is KJVO, since it is a "variety of the TR?" Would this at least partly explain why so many TRO men are against the NKJV? Please, lets stick to the topic. There is no room to praise or condemn the CT or translations from that here. Lets limit our discussion to the topic at hand, in the same manner as Manny Rodriguez and 4His_glory have done in the RVG thread.