Few Manuscripts & KJV

THE SUPPOSED "FEW MANUSCRIPTS" OF KJV TRANSLATORS

[ Reina Valera & NIV ] [ Subvert the Bible ] [ Ask a KJVO ] [ Almost KJV only ? ] [ KJV & Good Language ] [ What is a "Corrupt" Manuscript ? ] [ Notes on KJV Preface ] [ KJV NEWS ] [ Riplinger ] [ Dynamic Equivalence ] [ Doing Your Own Research ] [ King James Witchcraft ] [ Few Manuscripts & KJV ] [ Can a TRANSLATION be Inspired ? ] [ The Implications of Modern Versions - Does God Deceive People ? ] [ Historic and Orthodox Position on preservation of the Holy Bible ] [ Myth of Outdated Language ] [ Strain AT a gnat Matthew 23-24 ] [ Printing Errors in KJV King James Version KJVO ] [ Review of the book King James Onlyism - A New Sect KJVO Myths ] [ Jesus Christ only begotten Son of God ] [ Latin Vulgate ] [ QUESTIONS - LATIN VULGATE ] [ Role of Church ] [ Scofield ] [ SCOFIELD 2 (W & H) ] [ Foreign Language KJVs ] [ Vatican News ] [ Ankerberg and KJVO ] [ Cold - Love ] [ Where to Start ] [ The Word and Words ] [ False Pastors & Prophets ]

THE SUPPOSED "FEW MANUSCRIPTS" OF KJV TRANSLATORS

The Supposed Few Manuscripts that the KJV is based on.

Now please do not get confused between:

A. The Number of the Greek Manuscripts that the Textus Receptus is based on,

and

B. The Number of Greek Manuscripts that the KJV is based on.

Textual Critics often try to say that the KJV is not based on "many" Greek Manuscripts. The most basic question is:

HOW WOULD THOSE TEXTUAL CRITICS KNOW THIS ???

IF the world does NOT know which Greek Manuscripts the KJV translators used, then how can they possibly say – that they know that the KJV translators did not use "Many" Greek manuscripts ?

The answer is that they Cannot know, they Do Not know, and they are making this answer up !

But remember, if the textual critics then start suggesting that the KJV relied on the Textus Receptus as their "One" Greek manuscript, then that is a problem for KJV attackers...because they are - [these days] - trying to drive an artificial gap between 1. the KJV and 2. the Textus Receptus.

So the Last thing that most Textual Critics WANT to do – is admit that the KJV translators based the KJV on the Textus Receptus (Which is the truth of what occurred – primarily).

The reason that KJV attackers don’t want to admit this, is because if they do, they know that the FOCUS of the debate (about the KJV) then would switch from the KJV to the Textus Receptus.

And THAT is their Worst Fear, because Bible Attackers/Modern Version advocates know that the Textus Receptus agrees with 99% of the Historical Manuscripts of the Bible written in Ancient Greek.

So when the conversation gets shifted to the Textus Receptus, that takes the focus onto the OTHER Greek Manuscripts of the New Testament - that agree with the Textus Receptus, and that is 99% of those manuscripts.

In other words, that means that only 1 % of the Greek Manuscripts agree with Nestle-Aland and Westcott-Hort, and so Nestle-Aland advocates know that they are on very weak historical grounds, and that is what they hope that YOU will Not realize.

It is not that the KJV is based on so few Manuscripts. It is rather that the Nestle-Aland is based on so few Manuscripts, and THAT is what Nestle-Aland advocates...do Not want you to realize.