[Steven Avery]

Hi Folks,

Originally Posted by Steven Avery

As we saw above, the exceptions are essentially irrelevant... (I will check Minton as well).

Checking Ron Minton, he adds nothing new, only what we have already discussed, listing :

1754 eight volume edition issued in London by T. Baskett
1833 Noah Webster revision
1873 Cambridge Paragraph Bible edited by F.H.A. Scrivener

And no more. King James Bible defenders do not consider the Noah Webster revision a King James Bible as it incorporates hundreds of his peculiar revisions, such as changing the text to avoid indelicate words. It might be comparable to the KJ/21-Millenium versions (not considered a King James Bible edition by KJB defenders) although some of its changes would be more radical. The Douel editions (KJ/21, Millenium and whatever else they have) and the Jay Green editions (e.g. MKJV) make the error of changing the text. My conjecture is that they see the 'misprint' lie in a lot of places and want to look hip. Another reason to avoid all those copyrighted, deficient almost-but-not-quite King James Bibles, where they make changes that are simply unnecessary and wrong. And with Webster we saw how he was one of the first to raise the 'misprint' canard.

I referenced Baskett above as USA. This is complex because there were some editions that may have said London even though they were USA printed and to be sure either way more checking would have to be done. There may have a few Baskett editions in that period with "strain out". I have yet to see anything in writing at the time about why the editions were off, nor have I seen whether or not they made other changes. Perhaps 'strain out' in the Baskett editions was a typographical error . Maybe not likely, but far more likely than the 1611, where the probability of a misprint is effectively 0.

Shalom,
Steven