[Steven Avery]

Hi Folks,

Originally Posted by bibleprotector

And whether or not the battle to convince the modern versionists must be waged from relying upon comparing to their position, etc., rather than to primarily having a self-authenticating monolith.

And the problem is that you make this an either/or proposition.

We can fully accept the self-authentication of the King James Bible as our own faith conviction. God's word has proved itself over and over, daily and beautifully and majestically.

Yet that by itself will generally flop in the apologetics and defense arena, where the questions are asked "why" ... "how about this 'mistranslation' " .. "isn't my NIV based on all wonderful new MS discoveries" etc. Self-authentication has a very limited shelf-life in Christian apologetics and defense.

Ironically, when you wanted to defend your mistaken ideas about the textual value of the Greek OT and even accuse the Masoretic text of being tampered (apparently not understanding that that theory would make the King James Bible errant) you went back into historical study, such as appealing to Josephus (although you did not know he is actually a strong testimony against an early full-text circulating Greek OT) and the Aristeas letter. Your case was done poorly (ie. you were basically taking an untenable and inconsistent position and there was no way to get from A to Z) however at least you understood that such background can be significant in explaining and defending our views. (Exactly what you say the the current crew of active internet and book KJB defenders should not do.) And hopefully you learned from that discussion and have studied the issues more thoroughly. (Ezboard - Who's your Final Authority - 07/2007).

My view is that it would be helpful for you to really learn and understand the basics of King James Bible defense and understanding on such matters as the purity of the Masoretic Text and the fealty of the MT scribes, the MT's place as the KJB textual source, and the overt tampering (e.g. Psalm 14) and abject corruption of the Greek OT text. We understand you may forgo being involved in the apologetics, since you feel your work is in other realms, and I do not think anyone would object to your decisions on your priorities.

The key issue ... you would do well to finally end your attacks and dissing of full King James Bible defenders who offer wide-ranging discussions and explanations, like those discussions we see on this forum; and those defenders who have ably handled the modern versionists and no-pure-KJB crew. And you should not try to paint or taint solid KJB defenders as "original language" rejectors.

In many ways we are your greatest support, whatever our exact position on the PCE. As we clear the field, leaving the no-pure-KJB and modern versionists littered and hopefully laundered. Then from that position it is far more easy to consider Pure Cambridge Edition views.

Shalom,
Steven