"Look, professor, he's got a KJV Bible." "Stay away from those types, boy."

Peter Epps of Comment Me No Comments writes:

Thucydides 67: Phil Johnson correctly points out that this blog will be, er, interesting. Noting that someone who uses a pagan's name as a title considers the "AV 1611" to be "The Source" for sound doctrine, well, "interesting" barely begins to cover it.

The scare quotes, the unconscious assumption that mocking the AV1611 is fully within the pale of correct conventional wisdom. Look how far the propaganda of the devil-channeling left has succeeded to hear this man speak such words of the King James Version, the Bible of Owen, Edwards, Spurgeon, myself, and, oh, several million other Christians who don't fear man but fear only God.

Talk about succumbing to peer pressure. The devils have these Christians cowering and stumbling over themselves to assure the world that they don't read, of all things, the King James Version. "I'm correct-thinking! May I have more devil-defiled 'Word' please? Thank you, sirs!"

Please feel free to welcome another anonymous loon to the blogosphere.

Keep in mind, thus far, according to this fellow, I'm a loon solely for mentioning the AV1611 Bible. Oh, and maybe also for using the apparently outrageously pagan name Thucydides...

Anyone want to ask him why Erasmus gets a higher God-breathed rating than the Apostle John? Maybe he wants to go to Cyprian? Or would this be more his speed? Perhaps this or this?

There are alot of links in this paragraph I don't care to reproduce. You can see them in the original post linked above. He's not making any interesting points here anyway.

You can prefer whatever you like. But staking "sound doctrine" on fidelity to the compromise edition produced by a Catholic-leaning King

Which is why the modern versions, based on corrupt Roman Catholic approved (or produced) manuscripts, delete words and verses that expose false Roman Catholic doctrine, not to mention anti-Christian doctrine in general. Yeah, the King James Version is just a notorious Roman Catholic Bible.

to solve disputes between his traditional and Puritan Anglicans while corralling the growing pool of dissenters and noncomformists (who generally used the Tyndale/Geneva tradition of Bibles) that threatened his absolutist pretensions--oh, and based on the Greek compromise text produced by Erasmus, who averaged Roman Catholic opinions of what the text said in order to choose which marginalia got included as if they were Scripture--and who worked from no more than a handful of manuscripts--making this the ground of your criticisms of others' theology simply marks you as unfit for polite company, as far as I can see.

This paragraph is a sugar rant made by an individual with as much knowledge and understanding of what he's talking about as the average Roman Catholic apologist has of Biblical doctrine itself.

Aside from the article I posted just below, go here and read a shorter article that will open the eyes of any of God's elect on this issue... Read the entire site. (If the article posted immediately below looks too long, at least scroll down it some to see the list of doctrine that is actually changed or erased by the modern versions and their devilish manuscripts. For answers to the usual justifications for said deletions and rewordings read this aforementioned article.)

Why, you might ask, do so many Christians adopt such obviously corrupt manuscripts and the translations based on them? Because they're shallow. In areas of experience and education that tend to develop an appreciation for such things as inspired text and related things they are deficient. It's also, it has to be said, an issue of discerment. To discern Truth you have to have the Spirit of Truth in you. Any degree of defilement of the Word of God (and any degree of acceptance of the defiling of the Word of God) exposes an absence of the Spirit in a person; for valuation for the Word of God, and for protecting and defending it, is one of the surest marks of regeneration. In sum, though, their valuation for the Word of God is beneath their valuation for the opinions of man. They fear man's opinion of them more than they revere the Word of God itself...