[bibleprotector]

I find that I am increasingly disagreeing with Steven Avery's assertions.

I believing in perpetuating the historical witness that supports the King James Bible until the end. However, the "original language" defender of the King James Bible can be in all sorts of troubles, not just pride, but because they fundamentally are rejecting that the King James Bible is the Word of God itself in its final form. This can be seen because they continue to uphold foreign Bibles, and because they continue to think that the battle for the Bible is on the grounds of underlying texts/translations, and because they continue to think that they are contributing positively by investigating the sense and style and import of the original language basis to the King James Bible.

I. Since the King James Bible is the final form of the Word of God for the world, promoting it should excel beyond and replace other foreign Bibles.

II. Since the King James Bible is the final form of the text and translation of the Word of God, standing for it as settled is the way by which we observe signs and show the wonders of it, rather than merely just defensive counter-arguments and attacks against modern versions. Standing for the King James Bible as true is like a plough that goes through everything, to the point that there is no need to point out the 64,000+ errors of the NIV, etc. (Heavenly time is spent studying the truth, not merely identifying multitudes of error.)

III. Since the King James Bible is the final form of God's Word, everything sufficient is available to everyone to know it, which excludes the need for delving into the original languages, examining the margin notes, etc. The sense, style and import of the writings of Scripture are manifest in the English Bible, so that we may plainly access the truth without need of props. The Holy Ghost has ministers enough and provision enough that we may study the fullest depth and gain the fullest certainty of the Scripture by proper study without any excursions to the cloudland of misuse of tools, i.e. biased "contextualism", weighted "hermeneutics" and unjust balanced "interpretations".

Do we reject the original languages, margins, context, hermeneutics and interpretations? Only when they are used (as they often are) to deny the validity of the Scripture as manifest at hand. There is much that can be taken from Reformers, Puritans, Missionaries, Scholars, Teachers and Counsellers which aligns to the central maxim that "the Word is nigh".

I would that everyone in the world believed the English Bible rather than only a few, and I would that of the many people that must be saved, they would accept that King James Bible doctrine, even by simple faith in simple knowledge, rather than to have the Church slave to those who have the "higher learning". The true higher learning is that Christ is in every true believer, and that God has given every creature the Word.

There is a place for knowledge of the originals, etc., which must be in subjection to the truth that the English Bible is manifestly the final form of the Word for the world. Only then would we really be built upon the foundation of the godly men who came before us, and would we be properly be furnished with what God has used them to supply to us.