Gonna go dig into...well...I don't know. Let's see where the Book falls open.
Thanks, Josh...I did some research on the Ryrie and found that he is also a follower of the "new" texts in that he occasionlly explains the KJV texts with the old "this verse/word/whatever is not in the better manuscripts" in his study notes. I get enough of that out of MacArthur and why, when the dust settles, I have always truly/diligently/lovingly trusted Dr. Thompson's method.
I have always wondered, and maybe this is for another forum and if so apologies here ahead of time, why do those folks who insist that the the KJV is...how do I be nice about this...archaic, and feel the need to justify their erudition by those statements? Seems as if they are feelin' guilty about something.
KJV + Strong's = All you need