The Bible war.

KJVO state that it is...

 

That does not mean that it is the correct wording though...

 

eramus also took certain things from the Vulgate latin into His greek text, and your knowledge here indeed shows that His completed TR was not a fully 100 % free of any reconstruction or conjecture, and the Kjv itself based off of that did not follow his text 100 % of the time!

 

So which Greek text would be the right one for KJVO to be correct?

 

That is the problem with some, if not all, who hold KJVO view point.

 

Overall the KJV is still better than the modern translations. There are the well known points of disagreement. Some obscure.

 

There are instances where Nas is to be preferred though!

 

Yes. Revelation 15:3. But then it has the same reading as the NWT in John 1:18. The difference being a capitalized "G" in English.

 

The reading follows the f35 text more often than other modern translations.

 

Is that the best text to use?

 

The so called experts can, as that article made a clear case that the Majority text was not known in the church until 4 th century, as the first 300 years would ahve been very close to the so called Critical text!

 

Where it would be in agreement with the original. Now what needs to be understood on a case by case is why a particular reading should be understood to be most likely the original as opposed to not be.

 

I was just stating what that article was saying in regards to what the early Church had for their text!

 

Is that like when the translators of the modern versions use an ekelectic text?

 

What is now known as the Majority text was the minority text for the fist several centuries. It wasn't until after the 9th century that the Byzantine text became the dominant, or Majority text

 

What is the evidence?