This is what I meant by many KJV defenders who argue 'a priori'. Since, in your view the KJV has no errors, it is futile to discuss textual and translational issues because there will always be some dogmatic reason the KJV is right and everything else is wrong...and ultimately, the reason is not truely the arguements given, but because the reading is in the KJV (the presupposition).
Quote:
Originally Posted by armourbearer  Why not ask a question which requires me to state where I am in the spectrum rather than create this meaningless test? If you are testing me to see if I am cynical as to the results of all human endeavour because of human fallibility, No, I am not. I have not seen any errors in the Westminster Confession of Faith and I cannot see any errors in the Authorised Version of the Bible. There may be places where the wording of both human productions might be more precisely constructed, but the sense conveys the truth, in my humble opinion. |