I've always thought it fascinating how 47 dudes got together at the behest of King James and all decided what books went into our modern bible and which books weren't allowed in. And how for roughly 1600 years of Christianity before that, there was no one set version of "The Bible" and instead the people just had all these various loose collections of all kinds of scriptures.

Yeah it raises lots of red flags now that I'm older and can think for myself. Go listen to all the latest discoveries about ancient civilizations, structures, timelines and astronomy and the bible falls apart. Some of the stories hold water though. I have changed my opinion about religion recently. I think it's best to not focus on what man has messed with and keep it simple. Just God. No religion. No titles. No stories. Because it's all irrelevant to man and creator.

Yeah it raises lots of red flags now that I'm older and can think for myself. Go listen to all the latest discoveries about ancient civilizations, structures, timelines and astronomy and the bible falls apart. Some of the stories hold water though. I have changed my opinion about religion recently. I think it's best to not focus on what man has messed with and keep it simple. Just God. No religion. No titles. No stories. Because it's all irrelevant to man and creator.

no bama rich the Wescott and hort come from 3 the vaticanus the sinaticus and the Alexandrian that's all they used that is the critical text. the tyndale the Coverdale the mathews the great Bible the Geneva and king james come from the majority text at the time totaled about 5300 manuscripts today there are 6006 that have been discovered that have byzantine or syriac text type.

Joe. the king james is the Bible it is the preserved word of God. that's why it is constantly attacked.satan has been attacking the word of God since the garden of eden when he told eve yeah hath God said?. the king james translators were absolutely brilliant men many spoke 7 or more languages. the king james magnifies Jesus Christ the corrupt modern versions take away from the deity of Christ. there are basically 2 streams of text the Alexandria text type and the Syriac text. in the Alexandria text you thave the vaticanus the sinaticus and the Alexandria. those 3 don't even agree with each other. matter of fact they disagree with each other over 3000 times. the majority text or the Syriac or byzantine which is up to 6000 manuscripts all say the same thing the only difference is spelling. if they found it in Spain they spelled his name Pedro in English we say Peter. but the text was the same. the majority text is where the tyndale the mathews the bishops the Geneva the great Bible and the king james come from. Paul said in Corinthians that we are not as many which corrupt the word of God. they were corrupting the word in Paul's day. Paul and Peter and them were dealing with the gnostic. who did not believe in the deity of Christ. that's why Paul said if anyone preaches a different gospel or a different Jesus let him be accursed. the Alexandrians were a bunch of gnostic led by their cult leader origen.the first mention of the Alexandrians is in the book of acts were they were arguing with Stephen the Christian. the king james is the word of God the modern versions based on the minority text are jesuit catholic bibles.

Ok… so here’s a question you have to answer if what you’re claiming is true. If the KJV is the ONLY preserved word of God, then why has it been revised/updated many times over the centuries? IF it was the pure, unchanged word of God, why has there been a need for revision?

care to explain the differences between the byzantine syriac text type that the king james uses verses the Wescott and hort text that all the modern versions use. Wescott and hort were occultist also were part of a paranormal group. they also believed the earth is millions of years old. they were very ecumenical with rome. Erasmus rejected the vaticanus to use in the textus receptus because he knew it had errors. and why is it that the vaticanus did not be revealed till 1475. tichindorf who discovered the sinaticus had his private meeting with the pope who is the anti christ upon his return. there is evidence however that sinaticus was a forgery. Simondes said he faked it. even called out tichindorf to a debate but he never showed up Simondes waited in England for him but he never showed.. even if sinaticus was not a forgery he found it in a waste paper basket. they were using the leafs to start the fires in st catheines even they nlknew it was not a accurate text. all Wescott and hort used was vaticanus sinaticus and Alexandrian text to come up with their greek new testament. and just because got questions says something don't make it true either.

Now you only need answer how 40 different authors on 3 different continents over 100s of years apart, most of whom never met one another or read the other authors writings, came up with the same story of a fallen world in need of a savior. Every book in the bible is pointing towards Jesus or detailing his teachings. We know from secular historians that he indeed lived, was crucified and that over 500 witnesses claimed to have seen him after his resurrection. Secular History confirms those biblical stories. If you still don't believe then you only need to figure out how man, in all his filth, is going to come into right relationship with a perfect and holy God and how that would work. Man, throughout history has tried to make God into something he can live with instead of trusting in the fact we serve a God who requires that we conform to him and not the other way around. Christ is the one and only way. The God I serve isn't dependent on men making sure His word is here for us. He's big enough to make sure man can't destroy or corrupt what he intends for His people.

care to explain the differences between the byzantine syriac text type that the king james uses verses the Wescott and hort text that all the modern versions use. Wescott and hort were occultist also were part of a paranormal group. they also believed the earth is millions of years old. they were very ecumenical with rome. Erasmus rejected the vaticanus to use in the textus receptus because he knew it had errors. and why is it that the vaticanus did not be revealed till 1475. tichindorf who discovered the sinaticus had his private meeting with the pope who is the anti christ upon his return. there is evidence however that sinaticus was a forgery. Simondes said he faked it. even called out tichindorf to a debate but he never showed up Simondes waited in England for him but he never showed.. even if sinaticus was not a forgery he found it in a waste paper basket. they were using the leafs to start the fires in st catheines even they nlknew it was not a accurate text. all Wescott and hort used was vaticanus sinaticus and Alexandrian text to come up with their greek new testament. and just because got questions says something don't make it true either.

Now you only need answer how 40 different authors on 3 different continents over 100s of years apart, most of whom never met one another or read the other authors writings, came up with the same story of a fallen world in need of a savior. Every book in the bible is pointing towards Jesus or detailing his teachings. We know from secular historians that he indeed lived, was crucified and that over 500 witnesses claimed to have seen him after his resurrection. Secular History confirms those biblical stories. If you still don't believe then you only need to figure out how man, in all his filth, is going to come into right relationship with a perfect and holy God and how that would work. Man, throughout history has tried to make God into something he can live with instead of trusting in the fact we serve a God who requires that we conform to him and not the other way around. Christ is the one and only way. The God I serve isn't dependent on men making sure His word is here for us. He's big enough to make sure man can't destroy or corrupt what he intends for His people.