Replying to Avatar Sweet

King James Onlyism makes a lot more sense once you learn the history of Protestant Text Criticism.

The KJV examined every edition printed in Western Europe and synthesized them into one coherent work in English, then Scrivener came along and applied that same scholarly effort to the original Greek.

The pairing of Scrivener and the King James Bible are the canonical endpoint of all orthodox Christian scholarship. Everything after that is a deliberate attempt to commercialize. You have to get the latest Bible (which is copyrighted) every few years or you’ll never know what the Apostles *really* said. Majority Text advocates are just as guilty, they buy into most of the same presuppositions as the eclecticists.

That’s not how it works. There was one Bible that emerged for one Church in the wake of the printing press. The King James Bible is the inherited Bible.
Avatar
James A Lewis 2y ago

Reiterating my singular point so it's not lost in the deletes:

Jesus's didn't write the Bible, His followers did, and all of Jesus's teachings were believed and passed down orally long before they were written. Holy Tradition therefore predates and contains Holy Scripture. Therefore, Sola Scriptura is false, and so is KJV Onlyism as because it is downstream of Sola Scriptura.

Reply to this note

Please Login to reply.

Discussion

Avatar
Sweet 2y ago

Cool, so you don't know what sola scriptura (which I explicitly didn't defend) actually means, you don't know what the KJV Only position (which I clarified I don't hold to) is either.

You may as well just be punching yourself in the face.