ENDNOTES for 'The King James Only Debate: Can you Trust the Modern Scholars'?
LIVE ONLINE ENDNOTES! This book has the unique feature of providing all sources and endnotes within an online platform by offering live verifiable links right here. This title is truly the first book to offer such an experience. Let this book come alive for you with just the click of your mouse to enhance your learning on this great topic. These live endnotes are extensive and if you find a statement that lacks a source, or you believe any source is in need of correction, please detail your reasoning and contact us via email at https://kjvdebate.com/contact
These live endnotes are very important sources and enhance the context with a much-needed clarity on this topic! Source material may or may not reflect the beliefs of Write the Vision Ministries! The source material provided does not necessary mean we believe all of what each source believes and/or of all their writings. We must clarify this point for the critics are quick to point out sources used in this title and act as though we follow all the other beliefs or writings by each source (p.8). Thus, for clarification purposes, our beliefs can be read here at https://kjvdebate.com/beliefs-1
1. II Timothy 4:14; I Timothy 1:20; II Timothy 2:17 (KJV).
3. Dean John William Burgon, “The Revision Revised: A Refutation of Westcott and Hort’s False Greek Text and Theory” (1883); (p. XV).
7. Chris Pinto’s ‘Bridge to Babylon’ series on Amazon.com. https://www.amazon.com/Bridge-Babylon-Rome-Ecumenism-Bible/dp/B01LQ9WA2O/
9. Dr. Daniel Wallace’s reconstruction of Mark 8:22 https://danielbwallace.com/2020/09/01/new-discoveries-on-every-page-p45-p46-p47/
10. Dr. James White vs. Dr. Jeff Riddle on the debate over the reading in Ephesians 3:9 Oct 3, 2020. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q05oQTiTfe4
10b. See pages 330-332; 415.
11. ‘Is the World’s Oldest Bible a fake’? David Daniels: Sept 15, 2020, Chick Publications. https://www.amazon.com/Worlds-Oldest-Bible-Fake/dp/075891170X
12. Steven Avery has documentation regarding this controversy. Steven Avery | Pure Bible Forum
13. ibid., p. 18. Endnote #10 above.
14. ‘The Bride of Christ’ at https://kjvdebate.com/blog/f/the-bride-of-christ
15. L. Vance: ‘King James, His Bible, and it’s Translators’ (2016, pp.261-269). The KJVO movement started with King James in 1611 and has been around for centuries! the-word-god-will-keep-it-by-joey-faust.pdf (wordpress.com)
16. Texe Marrs interviewing Dr. Ruckman at the 35:00 mark; https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3rt9p_EqF3k
Chapter One: "The King James Advantage"
1. During my two years at Bible College in 1984-1985, the KJV Bible was demoted in favor of all the modern versions.
2. One example of Muslim’s propping up Dr. James White’s own arguments can be seen here at https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GYkPn2aXKds
3. Unfortunately, this is where it is all heading, and modern versions of the Bible are a big part of it. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2PSV72Tjy8g
4. Kautzsch, E. Gesenius’ Hebrew Grammar 2ndEd. Oxford: Clarendon Press, p.440 1909-1910. Repeatedly in the Old Testament, and as a part of Hebrew grammar, a masculine pronoun refers to a feminine Word of God. You see it again and again in Psalm 119, the psalm entirely about the Word of God (verses 111, 129, 152, 167). There are many other examples. The Hebrew grammar says just the opposite of what the critics claim about Psalms 12:6-7 in the KJV. Textual critics continue to bring up this argument when they should better, for this argument has been answered many times. When they are confronted with this fact about the Hebrew grammar they avoid it, because it is irrefutable. Many preachers and theologians throughout the centuries, including Jewish scholars, have said that “them” in verse seven refers to God’s “words” in verse six. The gender disagreement argument is beating a dead horse and a moot point. Without gender, the rule reverts back to proximity, and “words” is the closest antecedent to “them.” Simply look at the words that are closest in proximity. “Words” fits with “them.” Verse 6 changes the narrative and switches gears, then verse 7 summarizes the context in verse 6. If it walks like a duck and quacks like a duck, it’s a duck. Scholars and Bible critics are forcing the text into what they want it to say, for Psalms 12:6-7 in the KJV does not fit their anti-KJV narrative. To be consistent in their Hermeneutics failure, they might as well say Psalms 119:111 is talking about the wicked in verse 110, the previous verse. “Thy testimonies [feminine noun] have I taken as an heritage for ever: for ‘they’ [third person plural masculine personal pronoun] are the rejoicing of my heart.” Coming from the heart of a preacher who simply believes that the Bible says what it means and means what is says, all this Hebrew grammar, nouns, feminine vs. masculine, and so-called gender parallelisms is a bunch of unnecessary scholarly nonsense! And sadly, many gullible believers fall victim to the scholars who "strive about words to no profit, but to the subverting of the hearers" (II Timothy 2:14) KJV. See also Joshua 1:7; Psalms 78:5; Leviticus 26:3; I Kings 6:12 to name just a few. Gesenius' Hebrew Grammar (Dover Language Guides): Gesenius, Kautzsch, E., Cowley, A. E.: 9780486443447: Amazon.com: Books
4a. Knowing in your heart the truth about the KJV Bible is not a textual issue but rather a spiritual issue of which faith and discernment is the primary ingredient. This is not saying we are better than anyone else or have a 'holier than thou' attitude. We are simply saying we know the truth about this from God's Word itself, direction from the Spirit of truth (John 16:13; II Corinthians 11:4 KJV) all of which God will reveal in due time to those with honest hearts and open ears, and none other (Isaiah 30:7-17; 20-21 KJV; and p.182). One must ask an honest question here. When you hear the scholars and the critics say that 'no translation can be perfect, for only the originals are faithful,' we must ask of whom did they hear this from, God or man? If from God, then where specifically in Scripture did God warn and foretell us that no translation can be preserved perfect in our generation? If from man, then who or what Seminary or Bible College taught you this?
5. I was unable to find the specific dividing line episode on YouTube with this statement, but the reader may be able to verify which series Dr. White made this comment to me personally via live chat through Twitter as he was live on the dividing line segment.
Chapter Two: "Missing Verses and Words"
1. Whenever you hear a scholar or a Bible critic say, “I want to know what the Apostles wrote,” it is because they do not believe that there is any perfect Bible in the world today that says exactly ‘what the Apostles wrote.’ KJV believers by faith know exactly ‘what the Apostles wrote’ (Rom 15:4) KJV.
1b. Darwin's 'On the Origin of Species' was published on Nov 24th, 1859, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/On_the_Origin_of_Species within the same time Tischendorf was shown Codex Sinaiticus on a 3rd visit to Saint Catherine's Monastery in the Sinai Peninsula. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Codex_Sinaiticus
2. See also https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Codex_Bezae Most scholars are aware of the difference between Jerome's Latin Vulgate in 382 AD and the Old Latin and Italic of 157 AD but rarely mention it.
4. Isaiah 30:20-21 (KJV).
Chapter Three: "Attacks on Doctrine"
1. Jesus said “Ye shall know them by their fruits” (Matthew 7:15-20) KJV. Any man or ministry must produce the good fruits of faith and belief in the Word of God rather than doubts, questions, and unbelief (Hebrews 11:1-7; I Timothy 1:4) KJV.
2. Nick Sayers video teaching at https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=knrI2UvOlHI
4. https://banneroftruth.org/us/store/theauthor/alexander-j-a/ Bible Scholar, Dr. J. A. Alexander (24 April 1809 – 28 Jan 1860), in his commentaries on Acts (2 vols. Acts 8:37-38 pp.349-350).
5. The original manuscripts were produced in Antioch and all the cities of which the Apostle Paul traveled, not anywhere in Egypt. "And the disciples were called Christians first in Antioch" (Acts 11:26) KJV.
7. Should 1 John 5:7 be in the Bible? - YouTube John Ankerberg interview with Dr. Daniel Wallace.
8. Is 1 John 5:7 as it is worded in the KJV correct? - Follow In Truth (Jeffery Khoo, Kept Pure in All Ages, 2001, p.88).
9. Textual Critic Elijah Hixon's' webpage for January of 2020. Click 'older posts' at the bottom of the page for the January 7th, 2020 blog. Evangelical Textual Criticism: January 2020
10. A new plea for the authenticity of the text of the three heavenly witnesses, or, Porson's letters to Travis eclectically examined : and the external and internal evidences for 1 John V.7 eclectically re-surveyed : Forster, Charles, -1871 : Free Download, Borrow, and Streaming : Internet Archive
13. Jacobus, Catholic and Protestant Bibles Compared, p. 200, Note 15.
14a. Vatican City: Biblioteca Vaticana, Cod. Vat. Gr. 1209.
15. https://www.newadvent.org/fathers/050701.htm Cyprian clearly said “AGAIN it is written” as he quoted verbatim the Comma (pic #49 in this title, p.115). Source: Translated by Robert Ernest Wallis. From Ante-Nicene Fathers, Vol. 5. Edited by Alexander Roberts, James Donaldson, and A. Cleveland Coxe. (Buffalo, NY: Christian Literature Publishing Co., 1886.)
16. Dr. Boyce is a follower of Dr. White. Although these men are well intentioned, we recommend Bible believers avoid such men who cast doubts and raise questions upon the Word of God (Rom 16:17) KJV. https://citylightseattle.com/meet-the-team/stephen-boyce/
16a. See over 1500 years of witnesses and testimony to I John 5:7 in the KJV. https://www.academia.edu/81925237/The_Witness_of_God_is_Greater_by_Mike_Ferrando_June_2022
21. The readings of the modern versions are so absurd that even James White (The King James Only Controversy p.207ff or p.261ff in the 2009 revision), who is certainly no friend of the Traditional Received Text nor of the Authorized Version, admits that "there is much to be said in defense of the KJV rendering," and that he "prefer[s] this reading, and feel[s] that it has more than sufficient support among the Greek manuscripts.” However, Dr. White's views do change from time to time (along with all the modern versions), so we are not sure what he believes on this verse in the year 2022.
Chapter Four: "Answering the Critics"
2. https://w3techs.com/technologies/history_overview/content_language/ms/y (English has continued to climb since this chart was created)
3. https://www.languagecomparison.com/en/how-many-people-speak-greek-and-hebrew/comparison-20-35-7 (13 million Greek speakers and 9 million Hebrew speakers as of June 2022)
4. Although I do not agree with this authors views on the Cambridge vs. Oxford fallacy, a total list of spelling updates is available here: https://www.bibleprotector.com/400yearsKJBeditions.pdf
5. For a discussion on the Acts 12:4 controversy: https://youtu.be/R_rtLmClXmg
6. In this link you will find James Snapp explain his views but fails to mention that Beza corrected the reading to 'her.' https://www.thetextofthegospels.com/2022/04/luke-222-his-or-their.html
7. Dr. Stephen Boyce said this either in this link in his debate with Dr. Jeff Riddle on May 19, 2020, or within another debate with Josh Gibbs or Jonathan Shefield. This may be the actual video here at https://youtu.be/-RkxlW9cP0U?t=1975 Contact Dr. Boyce for the exact location.
7a. Being that the scholars and the KJV Bible critics do not claim nor believe they have a perfect Bible today in the year 2022, and don’t want us KJV believers to have one either, this is a vain attempt to claim the KJV is paraphrased like their modern versions due to the added italicized words. Not only were the KJV translators honest in placing the words in italics (unlike many modern versions), but they were given the understanding, knowledge, wisdom, and direction in translating the Hebrew and Greek meanings into a readable English format, for “there is a spirt in man, and the inspiration of the Almighty giveth them understanding” (Job 32:8) KJV. The fact of the matter is that a number of Old Testament Italicized words are quoted in The New Testament without the Italics. This means the italicized Old Testament word that was not in the Hebrew (at least not in any existing known Hebrew manuscripts) is later quoted by the Apostles or even Christ Himself of which that same word is in the Greek without italics. This demonstrates the confidence that God places in the Italicized words. Many OT quotes in the New Testament are in the Greek and not italicized when referencing a Hebrew word that is italicized, therefore, it has been there all along and is God's Word, for "every Word of God is pure" (Proverbs 30:5) KJV. If God treats the italicized words as Scripture, then so should we. The Italicized Words Inspired or Not? | Learn The Bible | LearnTheBible.org See also Should the italicized words in the KJV be removed? (av1611.com) Read more about this in the book at KJV Debate on pages 142-145.
8. A brief review of her book: https://youtu.be/g3eXVIa5lLk
9. You will not find any mention of Vatican authority in authoring the modern versions in the NA28, but it is located in the NA27 on p.45 seen here https://brandplucked.webs.com/theesv.htm and then search the NA28 below.... https://drive.google.com/file/d/1U3IUZsIuklf7UnkxUcUmKiN_OytGI2HU/view
10. Footnote 9 on page xv: https://www.gutenberg.org/files/36722/36722-h/36722-h.html
11. https://textusreceptusbibles.com/Based_on_Few_Manuscripts as an introduction. Erika Rummel’s 1986 book Erasmus' Annotations on the New Testament records the following on pages 41-42, "Clearly Erasmus consulted a respectable number of Greek manuscripts over the years. While he based the Greek text of his first edition on manuscripts readily available in Basel and hastily corrected for the printer, the Annotations incorporated the result of collations done earlier during his stay in England. Moreover, Erasmus did not rest content with these findings but, in the years following the publication of his first edition, personally visited a number of libraries, obtained manuscripts on loan, consulted the Aldine and Complutensian editions, and had variants recorded for him by his friends. The copious additions to the Annotations bear witness to his continued research." Thus, the claim that Erasmus only had a few manuscripts to go by is a fairy tale put out by the scholars.
12. See these resources for more information on the issue of the last 6 verses of Revelation: http://textus-receptus.com/wiki/Revelation_22:16-21 and https://textusreceptusbibles.com/Revelation_Textus_Receptus and https://www.thetextofthegospels.com/2019/02/erasmus-manuscript-of-revelation.html
13. LXX info: https://brandplucked.webs.com/nolxx.htm
Chapter Five: "Inspiration and Preservation"
1. Dr. White is unable to name any verse that is beyond potential future changes of modern textual criticism in his debate with Dr. Jeff Riddle on October 3, 2020: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q05oQTiTfe4&t=3900s
2. Since the initial publication of this book in 2018, Dr. White has converted to postmillennialism. He shares his reasoning here: https://www.aomin.org/aoblog/exegesis/max-lucados-apology-for-having-spoken-the-truth-ravi-zacharias-scandal-and-yes-mildred-hes-a-postmillennialist/ at the 1:13:15 mark and following. As such, and in fairness to Dr. White, much of what is said on this page is no longer up to date as of 06/22 since he now takes a firmer stance on eschatology and emphasizes its importance.
3. Codex Vaticanus has as a filler manuscript (GA 1957 from ~15th century: https://digi.vatlib.it/view/MSS_Vat.gr.1209 beginning on page 1519) for the rest of Hebrews and all of Revelation. But nevertheless, it still claims to be a 4th century manuscript of which does not contain the book of Revelation among other missing books. Look here http://www.1611kingjamesbible.com/codex_vaticanus.html/
10. The Byzantine Text-type and New Testament Textual Criticism (1984) by Harry A. Sturz. https://www.amazon.com/Byzantine-Text-Type-Testament-Textual-Criticism/dp/1631998064
The whole key to understanding New Testament textual criticism is not primarily comparing manuscripts, but simple history, geography, and weather. It really only requires understanding some historical and geographic issues and being able to look at maps. (Glenn J. Kerr: “Out of Egypt Have I Called My Son:” Why Evangelicals Should Get Over Their Preoccupation with Egyptian Manuscripts at https://www.baptistboard.com/data/attachment-files/2017/06/2802_12fba0f700b37a34abaf3f523cdf8469.pdf?fbclid=IwAR27xAqfzoKqKu1A-PuzhiySeouT9WoMyNDP1VcC0CQsvCnRC11t9bIyMuM
11. Original quotes on pages 21-22 from this: https://www.biblicalstudies.org.uk/pdf/gtj/12-1_021.pdf . An analysis of Dr. Wallace’s view is found here:
11a. In 1400 A.D., the world's population was only about 350 million souls compared to 8 billion today, and the printing press was invented in 1440. These are several things to consider among many other factors when we ask ourselves, why God would wait until 1611-1769 for a perfect Bible (in book form, not in scattered manuscripts) to come out? Why did God wait 4000 years to send Jesus Christ? God's plans and divine dealings with mankind is not something we can always understand. But we know by faith that God is perfect, His word is perfect, His word is pure, and He promised us to preserve it for all generations. Therefore, in the year 2022, and being that God cannot lie (Titus 1:2) KJV, in order to fulfill His promises and divine providence, His perfect and pure word must be somewhere today, and it must be in a book (as He promised also in Isaiah 34:16; KJV), and that book is clearly called a translation, and that translation is the God inspired King James Bible. Even before 1611, God was still fulfilling His promise before then even though there was a purification process (Psalms 12:6-7 KJV) for centuries leading up to the fulfillment, just as God promised to send His Son centuries before Jesus, (God the Son) became flesh (I Timothy 3:16) KJV. So, for KJV critics to use the prior to 1611 argument is a straw man, for none of them believe there was a perfect Bible prior to 1611 either, or ever was, except the actual 1st century original manuscripts of which are now dust in the wind. For some reason they don’t see the hypocrisy of their challenging us on this point. I like Taylor DeSoto’s characterization of their position, “they don’t have a perfect Bible, so we can’t have one either.” See more clarity on this in the book KJV Debate on pages 182; 189-191. Atlas of world population history: McEvedy, Colin; Jones, Richard: 9780713910315: Amazon.com: Books
12. KJV critics have a hard time understanding the difference between the original inspiration given to the Apostles to author scripture, and the understanding, wisdom, and knowledge given to the KJV translators to translate it. Even as Bezaleel, as the Lord “filled him with the Spirit of God, in wisdom, and in understanding, and in knowledge, and in all manner of workmanship” to work on the Lord’s tabernacle (Exodus 31:1-18). The Spirit of God still works through men as with Bezaleel in 1491 BC, the KJV translators in 1604-1611, and up to our own day in the year 2022. This world, the Church, and so many Christians are sadly so unprepared for what is coming (Job 32:8; II Timothy 3:16; Revelation 11:3-13 Habakkuk 1:5; Acts 13:41) KJV.
13. In a recent conversation online with KJV critic Nathan Cravatt, the typical critical argument was made that " It is impossible to have an exact word for word translation from one language to another. The KJV isn’t even close, nor did they pretend to even try. The original languages are the only possible way for true preservation to happen. God has preserved every single word." My response was, "This begs a question here. From whom did you hear that, from God or man? When you hear the scholars and the critics say that 'no translation can be perfect, for only the originals are faithful,' we must ask of whom did they hear this from, God or man? If from God, then where specifically in Scripture did God warn and foretell us that no translation can be preserved perfect in our generation? If from man, then who or what Seminary or Bible College taught you this? And if God has preserved every word as you said, where are they or where can I go buy a copy"? My question was ignored with straw man arguments, never answered, and any further discourse was deleted. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OxgiW2WLxwo&lc=Ugxd_S8JG0C2Din9bKF4AaABAg.9YEIPzzESln9d15lxFutDd
Chapter Six: "The 'Originals only' Heresy"
2. https://thekingsbible.com/Bible/23/34 The KJV translators were well aware of a "Rhinoceros" being a one horned 'UNICORNIS' in 1611! It is the scholars and critics who are spreading mythical fairy tales rather than doing five minutes' worth of research.
2a. One KJV critic said neither the marginal notes nor the KJV translation are inspired as follows, quote, "It came as a package! The marginal notes are no more inspired than the translation is...and visa-versa. What we have is the best guess of a lost generation. Nothing prevents us from doing far better." I said, 'What a sad and hopeless message to send out to a lost world by telling them God sends us His 'best guesses'." God does not send out 'guesses'! He sends out certainly and assurances regarding His Holy Word.' "For this cause also thank we God without ceasing, because, when ye received the word of God which ye heard of us, ye received it not as the word of men, but as it is in truth, the word of God, which effectually worketh also in you that believe" I Thessalonians 2:13 (KJV). God says He wants us to KNOW, "That I might make thee know the certainty of the words of truth" (Proverbs 22:21) KJV. I responded to the critics last comment when he said, "Nothing prevents us from doing better (than the KJV translators did)" of which I responded, "Well, I guess the scholars and the CBGM computers better get at it then, for the world is still waiting for that perfect Bible." Marginal notes are not inspired and are not always correct, but the final text of the KJV is both 100% correct and inspired, for it contains the scriptures promised by God to be preserved for us in this generation in the year 2022 (Psalms 12:6-7; II Timothy 3:16) KJV. Simple faith, discernment, and the leading of God's Spirit reveals this.
6. Although the majority position of the early church was some form of literal chiliasm, Justin Martyr in his dialogue with Trypho (1.80) says, “I admitted to you formerly, that I and many others are of this opinion, and [believe] that such will take place, as you assuredly are aware; but, on the other hand, I signified to you that many who belong to the pure and pious faith, and are true Christians, think otherwise.” https://www.newadvent.org/fathers/01286.htm
Chapter Seven: "Modern Versions and Bible Prophecy"
a. The LXX Septuagint Fallacy is one of the biggest scams to ever be poured out upon Christendom. The Septuagint Fallacy: An Indictment of Modern Criticism (Classic Reprint): Phillips, W. I.: 9781332240586: Amazon.com: Books
1. Such a perspective is iterated more fully here: https://www.lesfeldickbiblestudy.com/501-the-day-christ-vs-the-day-of-the-lord/
2. More information on this variant available here: https://archive.org/details/novumtestamentu02abbogoog/page/n799/mode/2up?view=theater
4. In my view, no matter how it is explained, the NIV is still in error in Zechariah 6:6. Nevertheless, Bob Utley says on this, “The Hebrew text has the term (BDB 29) "after them" or "following them." This means the black and white horses would go the same direction. It is possible to understand the PREPOSITION in v. 6 as "beside," implying another direction (i.e. west) or "the region of the west" or "toward the sea," which seems to fit the context of "four" representing the entire known world.” https://bible.org/seriespage/zechariah-6 . Nevertheless, this is a minority view and a snippet of certain commentators agreeing with “after them” rather than “west” is seen here: https://biblehub.com/commentaries/zechariah/6-6.htm
5. Discussions and explanations amongst some commentators can be seen here: https://biblehub.com/commentaries/ezekiel/39-2.htm . One may claim that the issue is primarily with interpretation/translation, not text, but nevertheless, the omission is still there, and a major prophetic prediction is missing from Ezekiel 39:2 in the modern versions.
6. Herman Hoskier says that the Harklean Syriac (c. 616 AD) contains “of them which are saved.” https://archive.org/details/Hoskier-ConcerningTheTextOfTheApokalypse/page/610/mode/2up . This reading is also found in the commentary of Andreas of Caesarea (c. 611 AD) available here: https://corpus.ulaval.ca/jspui/bitstream/20.500.11794/19560/1/25095.pdf . It is also the reading of manuscripts 2917, 2814, 2186, 254, 2028, 2029, and 2044 (links all within here: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1svgs1sat-DMu-mV1ZqEUnmZgkgg7loEoKfYejWDnUIM/edit?usp=sharing)
Chapter Eight: "Modern Versions and Poetry"
a. The NKJV is considered a 'gateway drug' with subtle attempts to introduce the reader to the critical science and lead them into the 'harder stuff' of modern critical versions. Lang146,147,148,149-151.PDF (avpublications.com)
b. Scholars will often claim that the differences in the modern texts and the KJV is only less than 1% or so which is very dishonest. Modern versions have thousands of missing words that are found in the KJV. The NIV version alone has 55,168 less words than the King James Bible and many major doctrines are attacked in all the critical versions by omissions of Holy Scripture (Revelation 22:18-19) KJV. Fair Warning!
Chapter Nine: "Words/Evidence/Questions"
2a. Scholars will use the argument of silence, but when there is evidence, they remain silent. Such is the case of the church father witnesses to disputed passages such as the PA in John 7:53-8:11. Ambrose of Milan 340-397 AD (Epistle 26): “The acquittal of the woman who, in the Gospel of John, was brought to Christ accused of adultery, is very famous.” (See also Ambrose's Epistle 74.) Jerome 342-347 AD (Against the Pelagians 2:17): "In the Gospel according to John, there is found, in many of the Greek, as well as the Latin copies, the story of the adulteress who was accused before the Lord.” (In smaller words: Jerome affirms specifically that the PA was in many Greek copies of the Gospel of John, and that the PA was in many Latin copies of the Gospel of John."
8. https://www.av1611.org/kjv/kjv_easy.html . Alternative perspective offered here: https://byfaithweunderstand.com/2015/02/23/the-reading-level-of-the-kjv/
9. https://youtu.be/zljgCcG0yXw with another analysis by Eclectic James Snapp: https://www.thetextofthegospels.com/2017/08/michael-brown-and-elephant-in-room.html
10. Another point of view can be seen here with a brief introduction to the Quartodeciman controversy in the early church: https://www.gci.org/articles/the-passover-easter-quartodeciman-controversy/
11. In depth information on Revelation 8:13: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1fgZVs42r0YfTt9x5ZAhdMPm6CVtX2jknsEzmUX00mBw/edit?usp=sharing
Chapter Ten: "The Two Big Lies"
1. The Text and Canon Conference from 2019 with Pastor Robert Truelove and Dr. Jeff Riddle contains invaluable information on the proper theological, historical, evidential, and analytical approach to the issue of text and translation: https://www.textandtranslation.org/text-and-canon-conference-2019/
5. Another source here at.... https://www.google.com/books/edition/Pal%C3%A6oromaica_or_historical_and_philolog/dZNhAAAAcAAJ?hl=en&gbpv=1&dq=erasmus+and+codex+vaticanus+%221439%22&pg=PA523&printsec=frontcover
6. Another view here at https://confessionalbibliology.com/2016/05/16/erasmian-myths-codex-vaticanus/
7a. Dr. Whites debate over the T.R. with Dr. Kleeck at 1:55:01.
8. Who and what is the vile one here... .https://www.google.com/books/edition/Life_and_Letters_of_Fenton_John_Anthony/Rxc3AAAAMAAJ?q=&gbpv=1&bsq=vile%20textus%20receptus#f=false
9. Page 5 (and 567) in here with its source: https://byzantinetext.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/11/editions-rp-11-appendix.pdf
Chapter Eleven: "The Manuscript Vault"
1. This chapter is a pioneered effort by the author not seen in other KJV titles and has limited endnotes, for each page contains manuscript evidence also available in color pdf form after the book purchase. Click here at Free pdf (kjvdebate.com) for your free pdf. In reading and evaluating the manuscript evidence for yourself, it is evident that text critical decisions are often made in advance according to ideology, presuppositions, and a bias against the Byzantine text form. The inconsistencies in this 'scientific' craft of textual criticism abound and can be found in hundreds of other examples aside from these 25 exhibits. We as Bible believers must "keep that (God's perfectly preserved Word) which is committed to thy trust, avoiding profane and vain babblings, and oppositions of science falsely so called" (I Timothy 6:20) KJV. Fair Warning!
3. When it comes to reconstructing ancient papyri such as p64 and others, it is obvious a lot of guess work and speculation is involved, and often times decisions are made as long as they contradict the KJV reading and/or the Byzantine and Greek Textus Receptus text.
Chapter Twelve: "Golden Nuggets & Foreign Translations"
2. This video from the BBC shows how white and pristine the pages of Codex Sinaiticus look. The pages of my 40-year-old King James Bible look older than this fraudulent document. Watch and judge for yourselves if this is truly a 4th century (AD 350) document or not. https://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/p00dy1gc
7a. The Text of the Gospels: Against KJV-Onlyism: Stop Usurping the Original Text Although James Snapp does not seem to understand Bible maps relating to ancient Antioch, and mixes up being KJVO with being T.R. only, he does bring about some good points showing many corrections the KJV translators made to the various T.R. editions. The claim that the KJV can correct the Greek & the Hebrew does not refer to the originals (which are now forever dust in the wind), but rather the KJV has demonstrated correcting many Greek and Hebrew texts as seen in these 100 examples.
Chapter Thirteen: "The Apologetic Dog and Pony Shows"
1. Today's apologetics is a far cry from how it used to be decades ago. https://www.amazon.com/Seduction-Christianity-Spiritual-Discernment-Last/dp/1928660843
2. It seems commonplace today for some of these dog and pony apologetic shows to drink beer, smoke cigars, and do shots of whisky in their warmups before attacking the KJV Bible. See for yourself here starting at the 2:55 mark.... https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mdZlXW9XaQI
3. Contact Dr. Ed for the specific episode of the recorded arguments he made against the KJV. https://christiandefense.org/
4. KJV critics often times resort the 'The Argument of Silence' fallacy. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Argument_from_silence
Chapter Fourteen: "The Septuagint Fallacy"
1. Any true Christian who understands 'good doctrine' (Proverbs 4:2) KJV will reject the heretical teachings in the Apocrypha books and know they are not inspired, nor canon. https://www.blueletterbible.org/faq/don_stewart/don_stewart_395.cfm
Final words on "The Septuagint Fallacy" coming from some old timers, preachers born in the late 20's to 40's. Before the 1960's (when the King James Bible was for the most part the only Bible around, as in KJV Only), and before most of the modern Bible versions began to hit the market, you would hardly ever hear anybody complaining about the fact that when the N.T. apostles were preaching, they did not quote the O.T. Scriptures verbatim, or exactly word for word. So what? It matters not. The Holy Ghost inspired the NT Apostles to quote from the OT and nowhere is there a rule (nor in scripture), that says it has to be verbatim, or word for word. The NT quotes enhance our learning, and it is the Holy Ghost that enhances Old Testament verses with New Testament verses. That is like saying Stephen should have quoted verbatim the 60 verses in Acts chapter 7 from the Old Testament. It's called preaching. Many of the NT writers were inspired and anointed to preach and teach from the Old Testament. Even when Jesus quoted or even read out of the Old Testament, such as in Isaiah or in Deuteronomy, sometimes He quoted verbatim, and sometimes He did not. So what? That's what preachers do; they preach and go all over the place, especially if they are anointed! Have ye never read the inspired book of Jeremiah in that after the originals were destroyed and the SECOND COPY was re-written (with added besides unto them many like words) by Baruch the scribe, in that both the ORIGINAL and the SECOND COPY (even with added words) were BOTH INSPIRED and non-verbatim? (Jeremiah 36:32) KJV. KJV critics are bringing up something that is irrelevant, and these questions all started as an excuse to back up the fallacy of the Septuagint being an Old Testament text, when it is nothing more than the texts of Sinaiticus, Vaticanus, and Alexandrinus, all (non-date tested) 4th and 5th century AD manuscripts.
Chapter Fifteen: "The Oxford vs. Cambridge Fallacy"
1. In 1852 the American Bible Society wrote Committee on Versions to the Board of Managers. In 1858 a second report was written, Report of the Committee on Versions to the Board of Managers of the American Bible Society. This information can be found in Dr. Thomas Holland's book, 'Crowned with Glory: The Bible from Ancient Text to the Authorized Version', p. 101.
2. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wicked_Bible Printing errors (typos) did happen in the printings of the King James Bible. Throughout the history of Bible publishing there have been some rather humorous examples of printing errors. Here are a few of the printing errors that have occurred in various King James Bible editions.
The printer of the "Fool Bible" had to pay 3,000 pounds for this mistake in Psalm 14:1: "The fool hath said in his heart there is a God."
In 1637 there was "the Religious bible" so named because it read in Jeremiah 4:17 "Because she hath been RELIGIOUS (rebellious) against me, saith the LORD."
In 1653, there was a misprint in I Corinthians 6:9 that read, "Know ye not that the unrighteous shall inherit the kingdom of God" and one in Romans 6:13 that read, "Neither yield ye your members as instruments of righteousness unto sin." This Bible became known as "the Unrighteous Bible."
In 1716 an Irish edition contains a tiny but significant typo. In John 5:14 it read "sin on more" rather than "sin no more." No one noticed the error until 8000 copies had been printed.
In 1717, there was a misprint in a heading for the "parable of the vineyard," which called it the "Parable of the VINEGAR." This Bible was called "the Vinegar Bible." These printing errors were soon caught and corrected. (Will Kinney). Modern scholars and KJV Bible critics attempt to compare these funny printing errors to their own omissions and changes in modern Bibles such as changing "God" to a 'he,' a 'who,' or a 'he who' is he in I Timothy 3:16 (KJV). There is a big difference in typos compared to TEXT changes, and we know it!
3. Mr. Rick Norris is drawn to the originals only Heresy' and you can learn more about his views at https://kjvdebate.com/blog/f/infomercial-the-bound-and-unfound-original-scriptures
4. While some KJB Bible believers hold to the Oxford vs. Cambridge fallacy thinking they are doing the Church a service, what they are unaware of is the fruits of this divisive teaching. It brings confusion to many believers in Christ and has many more concerned about finding the right and so-called only 'pure' KJV Bible rather than just going out and buying a KJV Bible. There is already enough evil and confusion in this world and in the Church, one does not need to throw fuel into the already burning fires of confusion (I Corinthians 14:33) KJV.
Chapter Sixteen: "A Fair Warning"
1. As of the original publishing of this title in 2018, this prediction by the author (to the best of our knowledge) is unique worldwide and proclaimed by faith alone.
3. Scholars and Bible critics cannot comprehend the fact that God is quite able and powerful enough to inspire a translation such as the KJV, especially if that was what His plan was all along throughout the ages.
4. One of the reasons that some readers believe that this title takes an adversarial approach towards the reader is that not many titles about the KJV Bible look into and examine the words of the prophets and the warnings therein.
5. Not a single verse in the Bible points to any of the early church or the disciples in the 1st century traveling to Egypt and authoring the original manuscripts.
6. The KJVO debate and all things related to doctrine all comes down to faith and what you believe in. You either have faith in the science of textual criticism or you have faith in God's promises, His power, and in His divine providence. The same God that was able to inspire His Word is well able to also preserve it throughout all generations, even in a translation (Psalms 12:6-7) KJV.
7. This author, in all due honesty and filled with compassion, got on his knees and wept in prayer before the Lord for Dr. James White and many others who attack the KJV Bible.
9. One of the favorite arguments by Bible critics and scholars is in saying, "Where in the KJV Bible does it say that the KJV will be the only perfect and inspired translation."? My response is, "Where in the Old Testament Bible does it specifically say that His name will be Jesus."? Better yet, perhaps the critics should listen to the millions of living epistles worldwide who proclaim by the Spirit that "if they speak not according to this word, it is because there is no light in them" (Isaiah 8:20; II Corinthians 3:1-18; I John 4:6) KJV. This is a fallacy called an 'argument of silence.' God is not spoken of one time in the book of Esther! Does this mean God does not exist or was not involved in working through Esther? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Argument_from_silence
10. Has your faith been imparted and are you ready to receive this end-time prophetic message regarding God's Holy Word from the Lord? (Hab 2:1-4) KJV.
“The King James Bible is the Word of God. The greatest thing that any preacher could ever do for himself would be to quit worrying about it. Just use it. Quit trying to second-guess what it says. Quit throwing it aside every time a contradiction seems to appear. Moses approached the burning bush because it was a contradiction. It was clearly on fire, but it was not consumed. He didn’t walk away in frustration. Instead, he drew closer and found the depths of God. To the Bible student who has accepted the King James Bible, contradictions are an invitation. They are not evidence of a weak Bible. They are evidence of the student’s ignorance. Like the burning bush, the inexplicable draws us to take a closer look. While others run to lexicons and commentaries, the Bible believer prays and searches deeper. God reveals himself in those searches.” John M. Asquith, Further Thoughts on the Word of God, p.124
Before the 60's and the modern versions began to hit the market, the KJV was for the most part the only Bible in town. Thus, the entire world was KJVO before the new kids on the block arrived.
This secure site is optimized for a better website experience. No information is kept or stored for your privacy and security.