[bibleprotector]

1) The Vulgate is a Latin Bible based on the wrong texts - so it is certainly not good to include it in a list of sound TR-based Bibles.

This is not what I was saying. Anyway, the Vulgate was validly used as a source for the KJB, and the Vulgate is not totally based on the wrong texts.

2) Tyndale's work was in English. So was the Bishop's Bible.

I was talking about "good Bibles", meaning in any language, and also referring specifically to the list of Scrivener, who compares the sources for KJB readings, and those sources include Tyndale and other English Bibles as witnesses, and also the Vulgate.

3) No one is defending every single point of Beza's, Stephanus', or Erasmus' Greek texts - but Scrivener's.

So, you are actually claiming infallibility, inerrancy, perfection to the very jot and tittle for Scrivener’s TR, even though it differs minutely to the KJB at a number of places.

You keep throwing out statements that it is undependable or unreliable compared to the KJV - show us the actual differences between it and the KJV.

Okay. Check the following references. They are Scrivener’s list of where he thinks the KJB followed the Vulgate. Some of these will be seen to be actual differences in Scrivener’s Greek, if there is no Greek source for the KJB using a Vulgate reading.

http://bibleprotector.99k.org/S.htm

Already, I have shown that Phil. 2:21 is a real difference, for the order of "Jesus Christ" or "Christ Jesus" in the Greek should be the same in the English. So Scrivener was wrong to have "Christ Jesus" for his Greek, when the KJB actually had the order "Jesus Christ" at that place.

Then no one had a sound English Bible until at least 1769, because that was when the spelling was finished being standardized.

No, we had a sound English Bible with Tyndale. There was no impurity in the version text or translation of 1611. And standardisation of the spelling is not completely standardised in the 1769. After all, we have "soap" not "sope" and "axe" not "ax". That was finalised after 1769.

But I said, "one final standard of appeal", which must needs come to pass in history, so while it may not have been fully known at one time, it certainly is present now.