Welcome to Our Site
God's Word in the World Today
How do bible scholars influence a modern world that's disrespectful of God's Word and filled with moral and political turmoil? Their many differing English versions suggest there is no standard book of God, and some of their versions greatly forsake literality, suggesting the Bible can be adapted to any modern taste, like popular magazines. This causes disrespect of Christianity, and it's capitalized on by a major competing religion.
Scholars also cast doubt on text value, saying differences in Greek manuscripts indicate God didn't preserve autograph inerrancy, leaving this task to them, but why would He endow inerrancy just to let it be lost? Christ said Man shall not live by bread alone, but by every word that proceedeth out of the mouth of God (Mt. 4:4); every word from God's mouth is inerrant, and if we're to live by them all, they must all be preserved for us, in our language. He also said we'll be judged in the last day by His Word (Jn.12:48), which today is in written form and must be inerrant, for error can mislead us to render judgment unjust. Do we believe God or men? God can preserve inerrancy, the same God who created the earth and maintains its rotation on its axis and revolution around the sun so precisely day/night cycles and seasons are fully predictable. Men know gravity controls these motions, but can't know what gravity is or how it came into existence.
The Struggle for Truth
Our basic problem is a notion of more recent modern days that advocating one English text and its textual basis is narrow-minded, and even cultic. Narrowness of truth is its safety factor ensuring against confusion and error. Christ tells us that His truth is very narrow, saying narrow is the way which leadeth unto life, and few there be that find it (Mt. 7:14), and no man cometh unto the Father but by me (Jn.14:6). Differing versions and Greek texts can compromise our knowledge of God's guidance on life and eternity.
Narrowness of truth should govern our response to Greek-manuscript variance. God gave us the ability to discern basic truth, and in our fallen world we can expect true copies and others to co-exist. Have scholars realistically tried to distinguish copies that qualify as God's preserved inerrant Word? They once favored Westcott & Hort theory suggesting Alexandrian texts best represented New-Testament autographs. The theory failed, and they merely produced critical texts with a little wider, mainly Alexandrian, basis. They failed to identify true copies and claimed the true text is scattered among manuscripts, but can be identified by them, which is impossible since that would require inherent knowledge of the mind of infinite God. Further, seeking true readings by text criticism is just an exercise in opinion (Essay 10), and seeking them through collation- derived majorities works only in a manuscript class of high quality, which is the large Traditional-Text class, the ancestor of the Received Text, and the minority readings of this class are apt to be true. Scholars discount the Traditional Text, preferring the small Alexandrian class that has severe quality problems.* They discount the Received Text, but it shows evidence of inerrancy, which would derive from select copies of historical biblical churches preserving an original Traditional Text (discussed on this website).
*See Hills, E. 1988. The King James Version Defended. Christian Res. Press. p128-38
Scholars who discount the Received Text dismiss the validity of some crucial passages such as the portion of 1 Jn.5:7-8 called the Johannine Comma, a vital part of verses that are the only literal scripture teaching on the Trinity, the union of Christ with the Father and the Spirit in the Godhead. The Trinity, only implied elsewhere in scripture, is the very foundation of Christianity, the basis of its doctrine and practice, yet scholars reject the Johannine Comma due to minor Greek manuscript support.
But the Trinity is the most disputed issue in church history, and would be subjected to censorship efforts. Gnostic and Arian anti-Trinitarianism are a well-known problem of the early-church era,* and the Comma refutes Gnosticism to make it a likely target of meddlers. Contrary to modern scholars, the Alexandrian texts show notable evidence of Gnostic-type tampering (Essay 3). It's found in minor degrees in many Traditional-Text manuscripts, likely those retained in medieval unbiblical church bodies that were many and large. The many unregenerate copyists there wouldn't guard text integrity, creating a likelihood of long-term error retention in many copies. Likely, few manuscripts were maintained in historical biblical churches that would be trustworthy, but few and small.
*Sturz, H.A. 1984. The Byzantine Text-Type & N. T. Textual Criticism. Nelson. p115-20
Is it a coincidence that Gnosticism was centered in Alexandria, Egypt, and Alexandrian texts particularly favor that dogma? Gnostics nearly overthrew the church, so is it a surprise that some readings denying their dogma have minor Greek support?
Extensive textual evidence proves the authenticity of the Johannine Comma beyond all question (Essay 4a), illustrating God's intervention defeating tampering in select Traditional-Text manuscripts. Text inerrancy is preserved by God's intervention, not scholar imperfect judgment of manuscripts subject to various errors, even tampering.
Out of the Shadows and into the Light
Critical Greek texts of scholars mainly represent variant Alexandrian manuscripts lost to churches for ~1400 years. God's Word cannot take the form of an unsettled Greek text lost for centuries, for there would be no standard. Further, when scholars choose their preferences from variant manuscripts, and keep revising their critical texts, what they really do is suggest God had to "defer to scholars" for full preservation. Their effort to assume God's preservation role explains why they fall into textual error, even failing to detect Gnostic-type tampering. We cannot tolerate men's tinkering in texts teaching issues like our Savior's deity, our eternal destiny and God's standards of righteousness.
We have God's truth only if His hand is on the text, from autographs to translations, so His control can't end with autograph inspiration. As in the case of the Johannine Comma, God's hand on texts produced after the canon closed takes the form of His enabling of scholarship, and other passages illustrate this (see God's sacred name YHVH, and the term replenish in KJV older English, and items 25 & 26 in 70 incorrect criticisms, and Easter in essay 5a, and No conjectural renderings in essay 4f). God's enabling of the scholarship behind the printed Greek Received Text explains its consistent accuracy indicated by KJV study, the small differences among the various Greek-text editions being indicative of a perfection process finalized by KJV translators (Essay 2).
Text comparison indicates that, prior to invention of printing, God preserved an inerrant text in select manuscripts, which would require His choosing and guiding of copyists and translators. A preserved text would maintain inerrancy throughout text history, and consistent accuracy of the KJV and its textual basis, illustrated on this website, typifies inerrancy, and this is emphasized as scholar criticism consistently proves to be wrong. We invite readers to review the evidence of preservation of God's inerrant Word in the KJV and its textual basis. KJV inerrancy takes an English equivalent form.
