Subject: kjv only

From: Jim West <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 26 Jun 1997 21:36:23 -0500 (EST)

I would appreciate any bibliography anyone could offer debunking the KJV
only idea.  If there is an electronic version this would be even better
(speed is of the essence here).

thanks,

jim

+++++++++++++++++++++++
Jim West, ThD
Adjunct Professor of Bible, Quartz Hill School of Theology
Managing Editor, "The Journal of Biblical Studies" at
http://web.infoave.net/~jwest/index.htm

[email-masked]

---

From: Andrew Kulikovsky <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 27 Jun 1997 22:06:03 +0900

> (speed is of the essence here).

DA Carson's book, "The KJV Only Debate: A Plea for Realism" completely
destroys this KJV/TR only idea.

cheers,
Andrew

+---------------------------------------------------------------------
| Andrew S. Kulikovsky B.App.Sc(Hons) MACS                   
|                                              
| Software Engineer (CelsiusTech Australia)
| & Theology Student (MA - Pacific College)
| Adelaide, Australia
| ph: +618 8281 0919  fax: +618 8281 6231
| email: [email-masked]
| 
| Check out my Biblical Hermeneutics web page:
| http://www.cryogen.com/hermeneutics
|                                                            
| What's the point of gaining everything this world has  
| to offer, if you lose your own life in the end?          
|                                                          
|                                   ...Look to Jesus Christ
|                                                           
|                           hO IHSOUS KURIOS!                  
+---------------------------------------------------------------------

---

From: Mike and Jeanne Arcieri <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 27 Jun 1997 11:22:53 -0700

> destroys this KJV/TR only idea.

Jim, 

Carson's book is good but dates back to 79. A more recent book is "The King James Only Controversy" by James 
R. White. This is probably better since he deals more extensively with the recent KJV crowd (ie. Waite, 
R.I.P.linger etc.). White does favor the NA26 type of text, and so occasionally criticizes the Byz txt. From a 
Byz-txt priority position I would disagree, but this is minor in perspective of the goal of the book. Highly 
recommend it.

Mike A.

---

From: Don Wilkins <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 27 Jun 1997 13:37:01 +0000

You might also request information from The Lockman Foundation
([email-masked]) and The Ankerberg Theological Research Institute
(615-892-7722). A few years ago I participated in a series of TV debates
for Ankerberg over the issue, and the other (more illustrious)
participants included James White, Ken Barker and Art Farstad. The tapes
are available, and no doubt other information as well.

Don Wilkins

---

From: [email-masked]
Date: Fri, 27 Jun 1997 22:01:28 +0100

The best statement I have found is the preface to the 1611 KJV, "The
translators to the Reader."  There the KJV translators themselves affirm
that every translation is the word of God and that they expected their
translation to be revised.  Straight from the horses' mouths!

You can find a link to an electronic version of this preface by visiting
my home page [address is listed below]; go to the link where I provide
my statment on Scripture, then find the link to the preface in the text
of that statement.
-- 
H. Alan Brehm, Ph. D.			Assistant Professor of NT
3000 6th Avenue				Southwestern Baptist Theol. Sem.
Fort Worth, Texas 76110			P. O. Box 22000
817-923-3008				Ft. Worth, TX 76122
817-922-9005 FAX			817-923-1921, ext. 6800
[email-masked]			817-921-8760 FAX
					[email-masked]

Visit My Home
Page-->http://pw1.netcom.com/~habrehm/professor.html									

"The highest reward for man's toil is not what he earns for it but what
he becomes by it"	--John Ruskin