Questions From A KJV-Onlyist

[Charles Meadows]

Michelle,

" Oh, but we can know, and we (some of us) do know. You are implying the KJB manuscripts were altered. You have no proof of that. We claim the Alexandrian family of manuscripts have been altered. It has been documented that they were. ."

I'm not saying that the KJB manuscripts were necessarily altered - but there ARE differences between manuscripts - ONLY ONE can be the original so some changes must have occurred along the way. I'd agree some weird stuff went on in Alexandria - but we STILL HAVE NBJECTIVE PROOF that Codices Alexandrinus, Sinaiticus, and Vaticanus were altered and ARE NOT the most authentic manuscripts.

Now God did promise that His word would last for ever - but does that mean the exact wording or the essence of it?

Even the KJB revisions have a few slight differences - so it seems apparent that God did not give us a word for word original. Whether or not we like that - it just IS!

I certainly prefer the KJB myself - but again, there is no scriptural support for strict KJBO. There is no "King James" or "AV" or "1611" anywhere in my bible (which is KJB) so I still assert that so should not go as far as to call the MVs impure or unclean. You CAN still dislike them however!

 

[michelle]

Peace and love to you all in Jesus Christ our Lord and Saviour!

--------------------------------------------------
robycop quoted:

Do YOU have EVERY WORD, as GOD spoke them? Or, like most of us, do you use an English translation of what some people suppose are God's words? Would you know what Jesus' actual words from the cross, "Eli,Eli, lama sabachthani", meant, if they weren't TRANSLATED for you? I wouldn't! So you see, whether you care to admit it or not, you trust certain scholars to have translated God's words into YOUR language so you can read them.
--------------------------------------------------

robycop,

I do not give credit to the KJV translators. I give the credit and glory to the Lord Jesus Christ and our heavenly Father for preserving his words for me and all of us and to provide an accurate translation thereof in the english language, and for using those men and giving them the ability to accurately translate his preserved words and under his provision. I thank God daily for this and give him the glory.

love in Jesus Christ our Lord and Saviour,
michelle

 

[sdnesmith]

Originally posted by michelle:
Peace and love to you all in Jesus Christ our Lord and Saviour!

--------------------------------------------------
Shawn quoted:

We are instructed to separate from those who deny these things, not someone who does not meet our own criteria of what a Christian should be.
--------------------------------------------------

Shawn,

Thank you for sharing your wonderful testimony! That was a treat to read, and I thank the Lord for your salvation. I also pray that you continue to grow in his grace and that you continue in the peace that surpasses all understanding.

I think you might be misunderstanding me. I do not doubt or question your faith or salvation at all. When I said touch not the unclean thing, that is what I meant: the "thing". When I say separate regarding this issue, it is the versions themselves, not people. However, if a church uses the modern versions, I will not regularily attend (become a member of) that church, but I would not say to separate from the bretheren/sisters because of their use. This is a personal conviction. I do not insist that you use the KJV. I am trying to encourage others to, because of the alterations that have been done in the MV's.

I cannot understand why a christian, who loves the Lord and has been saved by his mercy, would then not be bothered by the fact that the doctrines of our faith are weakened in the modern versions, and say this is the pure words of God? I can't understand this. I can't understand those that say those things that give strong testimony of the Lord Jesus Christ, his deity, his blood, the trinity,etc. are additions, and with no proof. Church history attests to these very words as being preserved by God for english speaking people. Today, now the person is caused to doubt whether what they are reading is actually God's words or not, causing one to make judgement on God's words. Is this what you really think God desires for his people? To doubt whether they have every word of God or not? When does it end? If God only cares about the message, to what purpose then is it to know that every word of God is inspired, if the orgionals are now gone? How then can we say that the scriptures are beneficial to our very lives? If we only need the message, then to what advantage/benefit does one have? What assurance does one have? And not only these things, but how does this attribute to our God being a personal God, if he does not speak to us personally with words? Rather, it is only the message, which is very impersonal. It makes one think God doesn't care what we believe, as long as we believe the message. God reveals HIMSELF and his will for us to us through his words. This is why every word is important for us and why he promised to preserve them.


Love in Jesus Christ our Lord and Saviour,
michelle

Michelle,

I appreciate the fact that you would not separate from fellow brothers/sisters in Christ but the sad fact is there are numerous KJVO churches down here that do that very thing.

Beside the fact that scripture does not specifically promise to preserve the words of God for English speaking peoples in one specific version, why do you feel it necessary for God to make that promise?

Consider this: There are four gospels. Each one written by a different witness to the events and each one depicting the events in a slightly different manner. This is consistent with witness testimony of any event. Critics for thousands of years have pointed out inconsistencies and apparent contradictions in the gospel accounts. Here's my question, if God wanted to preserve the testimony of His time spent on earth, shouldn't we have only one gospel account? Why allow there to be different versions of the same events? Does the fact that there are different versions of the same events dilute the fact that the events occured? Which gospel is the pure Word of God?

Approximately 300 years before the birth of Christ, Alexander the Great conquered most of the then known world and spread the Greek language and culture throughout Asia Minor. As a result, Koine Greek became the language of the common people in New Testament times. It was in this language that God providentially chose to record His Words. Today we have literally thousands of manuscripts that have been preserved for thousands of years. No other ancient writing in the world has that level of manuscript evidence. THAT IS THE DIVINE PRESERVATION. English, along with French, Spanish, German, etc, did not exist at that time. According the English-Speaking Union's website, only 6.2% of the world's population today speaks English as a first language. Are you telling me that in a world of over 6,000,000,000 people created and loved by Him, that God would only preserve His Word for 372,000,000?

Once again, prove where the doctrines of the faith are weakened in the modern versions.

Shawn

 

[robycop3]

Michelle:This does seem to be the problem doesn't it?

Actually, the problem is the completely baseless, unsubstantiated statements made in support of this ms or BV & against that ms or BV.

Shall I believe what the bible believing churches did in the past for hundreds of years?

Evidently you choose not to believe the writings used by the churches that existed more closely with the times of the apostles, choosing instead to believe only those mss that were made after Constantine mixed Christianity and paganism. (Where do you think Easter eggs, Easter bunnies, & Easter hot-cross buns came from?) I'm not saying that the Byz mss are corrupted because of Constantine, but if you're gonna holler about how corrupt Alexandria was, then I'm free to point out that Byzantium wasn't exactly simon-pure either.


Or shall I now say, well those things that have been omitted were added all those hundreds of years, and God has kept these poor people to believe additions to his word, even though these additions have STRENGTHENED the doctrines of our faith.

You still fail to explain WHERE the material came from that was added to the later mss, or how an older ms could OMIT material later found in a ms that didn't exist when the older one was written!


God is not the author of confusion, and he does not make people doubt.

And He doesn't make people pick & choose, either. Someone else does that.


Shall I compromise and say, oh, all must be the word of God. NO, I say that God would not want me to do this.

But you ARE picking/choosing without any authority to do so.


For God's words are very clear how important every word is to us, and how his words are put even above his own name.

This is another poor KJV rendering. It SHOULD read that God magnified His word ALONG WITH His name. I'll let you do the footwork to see this is true.

His words shall never pass away. His words are eternal and his words are sharper than any two-edged sword. God's power to preserve his very words to us and in our own prospective language, is unquestionable to me.

So they don't differ? Take this simple test, if you know anyone fluent in Spanish or some other language now in use besides English. Ask this person, if he/she has a Bible in that other language, and if so, would he/she read you some familiar passages such as John 3:16, translating into English as he/she reads. Then, please come back & tell us which is God's words-your English version, or their Spanish or other-language version.


So, either they all differ (in the english language), and God has contradicted himself and lied about not adding to/taking away from his words, and that every word that proceedeth out of the mouth of God would not be preserved for every generation, or he has said the truth.

The truth is right in front of you if you care to see it. There are no two mss alike, & no two English BVs alike. The KJV, the TR, & the mss from which the TR was supposedly made, don't match. Yet, you arbitrarily choose one over the other with absolutely NO basis nor evidence-let alone, AUTHORITY-to do so. In other words, you try to LIMIT GOD.


How then can one tell? I understand how, have you? OR are you one that doubts and ultimately rejects God's promises for the sake of compromise?

No.

The compromise lies in arbitrarily rejecting some mss or Bible versions without actually knowing if they're of God or not.

Each of the four Gospels gives a different account of the same events. WHICH ONE IS RIGHT? Which are wrong, Why?

Once again:

You say you're NOT KJVO. Which other Bible version(s) do you recommend along with the KJV?

 

[michelle]

Peace and love to you all in Jesus Christ our Lord and Saviour!

Charles,

I thank you for your reply and the kindness you expressed in it. I really do appreciate that. As I understand that languages vary in structure, grammer, etc., I also understand what God has promised. How am I to believe God when he says that man shall not live by bread alone, but by every word that proceedeth out of the mouth of God? How am I then to believe in the scriptures where the Lord Jesus Christ himself, and then the aposltes said "it is written"? As I have said before, it is not the changes of the words to another similair word meaning, but the altering of the word to change the context, and the omittion of verses, phrases and words that are quite important to the doctrines of our faith which have been long understood, and believed and taught and memorized within the believing churches. Why are there so many today, approving of those things that have weakened this strong testimony, and have altered the context? I do not understand this. Is it that people today, just do not want to contend for the faith once delivered unto the saints, because of an attitude of compromise and don't want to ruff anyone's feathers? What good is only the message to us, if we are told every word of God is what we are to live by? Should I then, not expect to trust every single word for my life? Has God explained to us and shown us how very important every word of God is? Yes. It is evidenced throughout the Bible, and what can happen if it is not viewed and believed and lived in that manner. When you speak to your children, is it better for them to recieve every word in order to understand the meaning of the message you are giving them? Why then is it different when it comes to God's words of truth? Words explain the message. If certain important words are missing from the message, it can alter or weaken the importance of the message. Why then, does God warn of adding to or taking away from his words, if it is not important? Does God tell us meaningless, useless things? If God has said, we should not only believe it, but obey it.

Love in Jesus Christ our Lord and Saviour,
michelle

 

[Lacy Evans]

Originally posted by michelle:

robycop,

Your choice of words is telling to me on your attitude concerning this matter. This is not gentle and loving, Christ like attitude toward a fellow sister in Christ. Your words are very dictorial, and violent, and unloving to say the least. [/QB]

Michelle,

I think Robycop is one of the kinder, gentler debaters on the BB. He always treats my arguments with respect. (And he REALLY disagrees with me.) These issues are very important to us all. I think he deserves a break. I reread the thread three times before I decided to post this.

Lacy

PS. If I could type as fast as you, I'd be dangerous.

 

[robycop3]

Michelle:I do not give credit to the KJV translators. I give the credit and glory to the Lord Jesus Christ and our heavenly Father for preserving his words for me and all of us and to provide an accurate translation thereof in the english language, and for using those men and giving them the ability to accurately translate his preserved words and under his provision. I thank God daily for this and give him the glory.

Can you *PROVE* that God was limited to guiding JUST the KJV translators? How about Tyndale, who was murdered for his translating the Scriptures into English? How about Coverdale, Tyndale's student who ofter worked at the peril of being killed for translating the Bible into English? Coverdale worked on at least three BVs, each different from the other & different from Tyndale's. The AV 1611 was different from any of them. The versions that followed are different from any of the earlier ones. This is easily verifiable since they all exist.

Please prove to us that God influenced ONLY the AV translators & none others in English.

And once again:

You say you're not KJVO. What other Bible version(s) would you recommend besides the KJV?

 

[robycop3]

Bro. Curtis:

Have you read THIS one by Cloud?

http://www.wayoflife.org/articles/newage.htm

BTW, THANX for posting that link!

 

[michelle]

Peace and love to you all in Jesus Christ our Lord and Saviour!

--------------------------------------------------
robycop quoted:

You still fail to explain WHERE the material came from that was added to the later mss, or how an older ms could OMIT material later found in a ms that didn't exist when the older one was written!
--------------------------------------------------

robycop,

The material you call "added" has been taught believed, lived, copied, memorized for centuries by believing christians. This is history. THis is the proof that God has PRESERVED his words. Those mss were not even considered until just prior to Westcott and Hort. They were stagnant. They were collecting dust. They were rejected by the sholars who had access to them previous to the KJV because of their inconsistancies and omittions to long standing manuscripts within the churches. I see God's hand of preservation of these words in history within the believing churches, not the absence of them. The absence of these things has not been accepted until this modern day, based on the sole premise that the older manuscripts are the most accurate. This denies the promises of God, and all the warnings God has said concerning additions/omittions to his words.

love in Jesus Christ our Lord and Saviour,
michelle

 

[michelle]

Peace and love to you all in Jesus Christ our Lord and Saviour!

robycop,

Thanks for providing the link to bro.Cloud's article pertaining to Gail Riplinger's book. I do not have time to read it today, but I do thank you and others for pointing out some of her errors. This in no way, says that I have changed my understanding and the conviction regarding this issue. I do want to let you know I appreciate all of your warnings regarding her and her book. I have her book, but I have to admit, I haven't read most of it, only part of it so far. So this information is good to have.

love in Jesus Christ our Lord and Saviour,
michelle

 

[michelle]

Peace and love to you all in Jesus Christ our Lord and Saviour!

Lacy,

I just wanted to quickly respond to your post before I leave these threads today - I have many things to do. The reason I felt that way is because he said I "must" and said he would "badger" me until I did. I don't find this loving and gentle language at all. In fact I find it violent and dictorial and forceful. If he truly believes I am being decieved by false doctines and myth's then I do not sense, nor have I sensed any gentleness toward my person or so as to convince me for my benefit, and the glorifying of the Lord. I have understood the opposite, in the form of attack against not only my person, but my faith and against the promises I believe that God would preserve his words for every generation. Many of the attacks on here, are against these things, and we are viewed and treated as an enemy, rather than a fellow christian brother/sister. So I make it a point to point it out when I come across it, just so they know that I also am a christian, and not the enemy. I do not take lightly to someone that says in a matter of fact way that they are going to badger me. How is this expressing the gentleness of Christ Jesus?

I however, will consider your advice, and thank you very much for it.

Love in Jesus Christ our Lord and Saviour,
michelle

 

[robycop3]

Michelle:Your choice of words is telling to me on your attitude concerning this matter.

I can tell you my attitude directly, w/o beating around the bush. My attitude is that you're making some claims without ANYTHING to support them, and while I'm trying to be polite about it, I'm NOT gonna just ignore it. My attitude is that EVERY false doctrine must be FOUGHT, with the TRUTH.


This is not gentle and loving, Christ like attitude toward a fellow sister in Christ. Your words are very dictorial, and violent, and unloving to say the least.

Duh...

Woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! for ye compass sea and land to make one proselyte, and when he is made, ye make him twofold more the child of hell than yourselves.Ye fools and blind: for whether is greater, the gold, or the temple that sanctifieth the gold? Ye fools and blind: for whether is greater, the gift, or the altar that sanctifieth the gift? Woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! for ye pay tithe of mint and anise and cummin, and have omitted the weightier matters of the law, judgment, mercy, and faith: these ought ye to have done, and not to leave the other undone. Woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! for ye make clean the outside of the cup and of the platter, but within they are full of extortion and excess. Woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! for ye are like unto whited sepulchres, which indeed appear beautiful outward, but are within full of dead men's bones, and of all uncleanness. Woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! because ye build the tombs of the prophets, and garnish the sepulchres of the righteous. Ye serpents, ye generation of vipers, how can ye escape the damnation of hell?

-JESUS CHRIST, to a group of men, Matthew 15, KJV

I haven't "spoken" to YOU even HALF as roughly as the gentle and loving Christ spoke to those men purveying false doctrines of their own, men who added to God's commands.(When did GOD ordain the first Pharisee? And how about their hand-washing ceremony ADDED to God's commands?) And I don't INTEND to. However, I WILL keep calling for *PROOF* for your assertions about God's word. I believe that's entirely reasonable.


If you truly believe I am believing false doctine and a myth as you so claim, then how is this attitude going to convince?

Because I have given PROOFS & REASONS why your doctrine is wrong, while you haven't provided one scintilla of evidence why anyone should believe your doctrine.


How does this attitude show me that you are genuinely concerned for my personal welfare in all this? Please also show me how you are glorifying the Lord Jesus Christ and in all of this?

All I can do is provide the evidence. If you don't like the "paper" it's wrapped in, I can't help it. If I weren't concerned about your Spiritual welfare (and that of others) I wouldn't take the time nor make the effort to type the TRUTH here and on other boards. What benefit do I get from doing this? Absolutely none. Only my family and a few close friends know I do this. I don't think anyone on this board knows me personally. If I were out for an ego trip, I'd stick to discussion groups about the history of war, a subject that I have more than a little knowledge about.

As a Christian who's chosen the Baptist faith, I know I have a duty to fight any & all false doctrines that rear their ugly heads within our faith. KJVO is one of them.

Oh, wait....MY BAD!

I FORGOT that you said you're NOT KJVO! In that case, what other Bible version(s) besides the KJV would you recommend?

 

[sdnesmith]

Yea, what roby said.

 

[robycop3]

Michelle:The material you call "added" has been taught believed, lived, copied, memorized for centuries by believing christians.

And the older mss, or copies of them, were used for over 800 years after the Revelation. They were used for some 500 years to combat Constantine's compromising-with-pagan-practices flavor of Christianity. A little perusal of a good encyclopedia will verify this.

This is history. THis is the proof that God has PRESERVED his words. Those mss were not even considered until just prior to Westcott and Hort. They were stagnant. They were collecting dust. They were rejected by the sholars who had access to them previous to the KJV because of their inconsistancies and omittions to long standing manuscripts within the churches.

Actually, the Vatican refused to allow anyone to read the ms they had. And the RCC had a LOT to do with the suppression of the older mss. Once again, hit the ole encyclopedia. And about Sinaiticus having been found in a trash can-did you ever consider God might've SPARED it from destruction?

And you STILL are saying the older mss OMITTED some material! However you ABSOLUTELY REFUSE to try to tell us HOW an OLDER ms could OMIT something found only in LATER mss, without providing us with a yet-older COMMON SOURCE from which BOTH were copied!


I see God's hand of preservation of these words in history within the believing churches, not the absence of them. The absence of these things has not been accepted until this modern day, based on the sole premise that the older manuscripts are the most accurate. This denies the promises of God, and all the warnings God has said concerning additions/omittions to his words.

DOES IT? Seems that the LATER mss could well have material ADDED. Otherwise, why would they have MORE material than the OLDER mss?

And once again:

You say you're not KJVO. What other Bible version(s) would you recommend besides the KJV?

 

[robycop3]

Michelle:Thanks for providing the link to bro.Cloud's article pertaining to Gail Riplinger's book. I do not have time to read it today, but I do thank you and others for pointing out some of her errors.

You're most welcome!

How important is the versions issue to me? It's important enuff that I took the time to read all of Ben Wilkinson's long, boring"Our Authorized Bible Vindicated", as well as several of Dean Burgon's books, those of J.J.Ray, Dr, D.O.Fuller,and later, Dr. Donald Waite, Riplinger, Ruckman, Hyles, Reagan, Moorman, Marrs, Gipp, Faust, Evans, & Holland, to name a few. I tracked down the source9s) for every one of their assertions, followed every bunny trail in them to check their veracity & to learn all I could about the subject. Believe me, this took TIME before the advent of the Net, and it still takes time & effort today. From all this, I'm 100% convinced that KJVO is nothing more than a man-made myth, not of GOD at all.


This in no way, says that I have changed my understanding and the conviction regarding this issue. I do want to let you know I appreciate all of your warnings regarding her and her book. I have her book, but I have to admit, I haven't read most of it, only part of it so far. So this information is good to have.

I hope you find the time to read it all, and to check out her sources. I think you'll really open your eyes if you verify FOR YOURSELF her misquotes of other authors by seeing their actual words in their books, as well as her other boo-boos. This is far more convincing than anything I or another would say. You'll see we're telling the ABSOLUTE TRUTH about her work & the KJVO myth in general.

 

[robycop3]

Michelle:I just wanted to quickly respond to your post before I leave these threads today - I have many things to do. The reason I felt that way is because he said I "must" and said he would "badger" me until I did.

I see nothing wrong in asking someone to back up her claims.


I don't find this loving and gentle language at all. In fact I find it violent and dictorial and forceful.

How? Did I threaten you? Am I "stalking" you? I merely intend to keep asking a question that YOUR OWN WORDS have begged until you either answer it or admit you blew it.


If he truly believes I am being decieved by false doctines and myth's then I do not sense, nor have I sensed any gentleness toward my person or so as to convince me for my benefit, and the glorifying of the Lord.

Evidently, simply asking you for PROOF for your statements isn't enough, or you simply choose to ignore such requests & expect us to believe you anyway. Sorry, that just WON'T FLY here.


I have understood the opposite, in the form of attack against not only my person, but my faith and against the promises I believe that God would preserve his words for every generation.

I can't speak for everyone, but have "I" ever said anything like, "Michelle, you're a 'whatever' "? As for God's promise of preservation, I've pointed out two errors you evidently believe about it: that God's words were purified after he spoke them, and that He magnified His words ABOVE His name. That's a poor KJV translation. Are even GOD'S words greater than GOD HIMSELF???


Many of the attacks on here, are against these things, and we are viewed and treated as an enemy, rather than a fellow christian brother/sister. So I make it a point to point it out when I come across it, just so they know that I also am a christian, and not the enemy.

I haven't questioned your FAITH-just your belief in a certain false doctrine that's been inserted by men within the tenets of that faith as you perceive those tenets. I, and others, have shown you WHY that doctrine is false, but it seems our posting of the TRUTH has fallen onto deaf eyes.


I do not take lightly to someone that says in a matter of fact way that they are going to badger me.

You have several simple remedies to end the badgering and "shut me up" on the issue. The obvious solution is to answer the question. (Remember how readily I answer any legit Q you ask me?) Or, you could opt out of the board.(Which I hope you DON'T do!!) Or, you could provide some solid, empirical PROOF that KJVO is right! No rocket science needed!

How is this expressing the gentleness of Christ Jesus?

Not NEARLY as "tuff" as He Himself expressed His gentleness in Matthew 15. Not once have I called you, "hypocrite, fool, blind guide", nor do I intend to.

And once again:

You say you're not KJVO. What other Bible version(s) would you recommend besides the KJV?

 

[Lacy Evans]

Originally posted by robycop3:

And you STILL are saying the older mss OMITTED some material! However you ABSOLUTELY REFUSE to try to tell us HOW an OLDER ms could OMIT something found only in LATER mss, without providing us with a yet-older COMMON SOURCE from which BOTH were copied! [/QB]

It doesn't take but a little bit of conjecture to answer this. (And much of modern Textual criticism seems to me to be conjecture.)
It makes sense at first glance that the water would be purer, the closer you got to the source. (ie The older, the better.) But what if someone threw a carcass in the stream just down from the source. (The Roman Catholic Church) Then the opposite would be true. The farther away from the carcass, the purer the water, until the water was pure again.

If God restored the Words perfectly, it makes sense that he would put the missing words back in. I believe many of the things that are omitted (Lost to the older greek manuscripts.) could actually have been transmitted through other languages besides Greek. (Latin, for example. The KJV translators were not married to the Greek manuscripts.)

It seems to me that it is very presumptuous to assume that "older is better". The only thing we can know for sure is that "Better is better".

Lacy

 

[robycop3]

Pastor Lacy, there's not the slightest bit of evidence suggesting God's had to "restore" His word. If this were so, then we could argue that part of this restoration was the rescue of Sinaiticus from the trash can.

The evidence shows that God has provided His word in English for a long time, in the language of the day. Remember, it's by the power and will of God that any given people uses any given language or dialect at any given time. God has willed that we use the language(s) we now use, & He's provided His word in these languages. He did NOT retire in 1611.

BTW, are you related to Dr. Herb Evans? (This is NOT meant to be a loaded question!)

 

[Lacy Evans]

Originally posted by robycop3:
BTW, are you related to Dr. Herb Evans? (This is NOT meant to be a loaded question!) [/QB]

I meant to answer that when you asked before. Sorry. No I am not. (As far as I know.) He and I have some serious differences reguarding the Judgment Seat of Christ, and the doctrine of reward. He wouldn't claim me if I was his long-lost cousin.

Lacy

 

[Lacy Evans]

Originally posted by robycop3:
[QB] Pastor Lacy, there's not the slightest bit of evidence suggesting God's had to "restore" His word.

Perhaps not direct evidence, but he does seem undaunted by the destruction of the original tablets of the 10 commandments and the destruction of Jeremiah's autographs. The other example in my article when the word was lost (II Kings 22) after a period of apostasy, then found during a time of seeking, repentance, and revival, speaks (to me) of how God handles his written revelation to man.

If this were so, then we could argue that part of this restoration was the rescue of Sinaiticus from the trash can.

In no way do I mean this sarcastically, but isn't that what most MVers believe? Sinaiticus should be given a fair look, as should anything else that calls itself inspired. Ultimately though, I think the KJV bears all the marks of inspired scripture, far and beyond anything else extant.

He did NOT retire in 1611.

Of course not. If time goes long enough, and we get wicked enough that he judges us by taking away our "prophets", our "revelation", He will raise it up again in the language of the next group of humble seekers.


Lacy

PS. It is a privilege to debate you. Thank you for your frank, reasonable arguments. I don't get that nearly often enough. With worthy opponents like you, I might just hang around. (Whether that's a good thing or not, I won't presume to say.)