Well your knowledge is no better than mine - you just "believe" the knowledge that you represent.

On the contrary, I know much about the history of the different Bible versions because I've studied this subject extensively. It's the reason I'm no longer an agnostic, in fact.

From my experience, it's the people who make claims such as "KJV is so diluted I wouldn't exactly call it a source" who are the ones telling people what "the truth" is in spite of the fact they are poorly educated on the subject and can't even tell me what the Codex Vaticanus is without Googling it. And, of course, they use Google.

So when it comes down to it, when you make claims the KJV is diluted, you better bring some sauce.

And if you have a theory about something based on research, share it. It sounds like you're scared of Bible believers punching holes in your theory, though.

Well your knowledge is no better than mine - you just "believe" the knowledge that you represent.

On the contrary, I know much about the history of the different Bible versions because I've studied this subject extensively. It's the reason I'm no longer an agnostic, in fact.

From my experience, it's the people who make claims such as "KJV is so diluted I wouldn't exactly call it a source" who are the ones telling people what "the truth" is in spite of the fact they are poorly educated on the subject and can't even tell me what the Codex Vaticanus is without Googling it. And, of course, they use Google.

So when it comes down to it, when you make claims the KJV is diluted, you better bring some sauce.

And if you have a theory about something based on research, share it. It sounds like you're scared of Bible believers punching holes in your theory, though.

P.S. While it is a matter of faith to believe the Bible is the truth, the fulfillment of prophecy gives me more of a basis for my beliefs than the people injecting themselves with the clot shot based on the words of Anthony Fauci.

Well your knowledge is no better than mine - you just "believe" the knowledge that you represent.

On the contrary, I know much about the history of the different Bible versions because I've studied this subject extensively. It's the reason I'm no longer an agnostic, in fact.

From my experience, it's the people who make claims such as "KJV is so diluted I wouldn't exactly call it a source" who are the ones telling people what "the truth" is in spite of the fact they are poorly educated on the subject and can't even tell me what the Codex Vaticanus is without Googling it. And, of course, they use Google.

So when it comes down to it, when you make claims the KJV is diluted, you better bring some sauce.

And if you have a theory about something based on research, share it. It sounds like you're scared of Bible believers punching holes in your theory, though.