Jim Lincoln wrote:
Of course John, UK, the [A]nglican [V]ersion didn't even use the Textus Receptus? It wasn't published until 14 years after the first version of the AV? If memory serves it used the Stephanous version of the Erasmus translation.

"How many editions of the Textus Receptus are there?
There were approximately thirty distinct editions of the Textus Receptus made over the years. Each differs slightly from the others. There have been over 500 printings.

Why are various editions called 'Erasmus', 'Stephens', etc.?
Numerous men during the past four centuries have produced editions of the Textus Receptus; these editions bear their names and the years in which they were published. These include:

the work of Stunica as published in the Complutensian Polyglot (printed in 1514 but not circulated until 1522);

the Erasmus editions of 1516, 1519, 1522, 1527 and 1535;

the Colinæus edition of 1534 which was made from the editions of Erasmus and the Complutensian Polyglot.

the Stephens editions (produced by Robert Estienne, who is also called Stephanus or Stephens) of 1546, 1549, 1550 and 1551;

No Way Hose wrote:
of textual critics

This German critic mentioned was Tischendorf. The text found in the waste-paper basket was manuscript Aleph (Sinai). Recently retired 89-year-old Pastor Carl Drexler, of Runnemede, New Jersey, used to refer to such higher critics as Tischendorf by a descriptive term. He called them "the higher liar, critics." This, in too many instances, is correct. The disuse of B, Aleph and a few others explains why they were preserved instead of being "thumbed to pieces."

Mike wrote:
Still limiting the Holy Spirit's ability to a version? Is it good to place version above Author?
You already know the word perfect here means complete, not without error or mistake, as the word is typically understood.

But divine hands can and does "guide" us into all truth. Jesus confirms this.

If the Holy Spirit using the Word of God is going to bring the Remnant to a "complete" status, will His work/result be shot full of error and mistakes? Indeed will He lead us in the wrong direction?

One of the basic errors the church has made in introducing modern versions is to establish doubt. The doubt is "Do we really have the Word of God, or is the confusion represented by myriad of Greek texts and new interpretations (versions) demonstrating that we do not have God's Holy Word?" This is the Devil's handiwork just as he used this same ruse with Eve in the Garden of Eden. "Did God really say that?"

Mike wrote:
Then you need not concern yourself about these versions, for in your doctrine, they cannot be used to change an outcome.

John 16:13 Howbeit when he, the Spirit of truth, is come, he will guide you into all truth: for he shall not speak of himself; but whatsoever he shall hear, that shall he speak: and he will shew you things to come.

No point in the Holy Spirit using the wrong book to do this is there?

After all......

2Tim 3:16 All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness: 17 That the man of God may be perfect, throughly furnished unto all good works.

No Way Hose wrote:
why should we believe your experts over others who say otherwise, and why should we admit your selection of texts as the standard by which to judge all deviations over others which do not agree with your selection?

Thus God will eliminate the use of erroneous written works, just as He will remove the heretic preacher from His True Church and disciples.

No Way Hose wrote:
And leaving aside Westcott and Hort, what about the older scripts like Vaticanus and Sinaiticus?

"The Vatican and Sinai Manuscripts
In the mid-nineteenth century the Codex Sinaiticus and Codex Vaticanus became available to Biblical scholars, and in 1881 Westcott and Hort advanced the theory that the New Testament text was preserved in an almost perfect state in these two fourth century manuscripts.

An Error of Judgment
The discovery of these MSS betrayed many Biblical students into a lamentable infirmity of critical judgment. Tischendorf himself, the discoverer of the Sinai Codex, amended his eighth edition in at least 3,505 places in conformity with new readings which he found in this document. The Codex Vaticanus exercised a similar mesmeric influence on the minds of many 19th and 20th century scholars. The revised Greek text underlying modern versions has the support only of that very small minority of the available MSS which are in some respects in agreement with the unreliable text of the Sinai and Vatican codices.

Jim Lincoln wrote:
Many of the King James Onlyism group, don't believe the [A][V] can be modified, though it was greatly before 1770, q.v., even though the AV is a Catholic Bible, q.v, Is the King James Version a ‘Roman Catholic Bible’?, doesn't mean that Protestants haven't put this flawed version of the Bible to good use. I am sure many Protestants put the Vulgate version Bible to good use, but that doesn't mean we should be using that either

Not only that - he gets history all wrong!!

According to Jim Lincoln God waited until the 20th century to publish His Holy Word!!

Jim Lincoln wrote:
1) the plain fact that the [A]nglican [V]ersion was contrived by man for political purposes,

2) it is a poor Bible, and as I said a very poor one at that. Comparing Bible Translations--Conclusions.

3) Most Christian churches don't use this corruption of God's Word, I'd suggest that you get a good Bible rather than one

4) endorsed by the Mormon Church. King James Onlyism is what is anti-Christian.

5) So one defends God's Word by attacking corruptions of it such as the AV

1) Lincoln removes divine hands and the Holy Spirit from God's work, His testimonies, His promises and His law, of the last four centuries.

2) Lincoln degrades and demeans the Word of God and the work of the Holy Spirit.

3) Lincoln calls the Word and work of God "corrupt"

4) Lincoln unites the Word of God, and the work of the Holy Spirit with cults.

5) Lincoln demeans the work and Word of God as requiring a "defence" by sinner man.

Jim Lincoln wrote:
I forgot just how many revisions the AV went through! Part III: From the KJV to the RV (from Elegance to Accuracy). So, 1769, considering that the AV is a ‘Roman Catholic Bible’ filled with errors, q.v., Indisputable, universally recognized errors in the KJV.

This is NOT how the true Christian thinks and acts.

Psalm 68:11 The Lord gave the word: great was the company of those that published it."

Psa 119: 5 O that my ways were directed to keep thy statutes!
6 Then shall I not be ashamed, when I have respect unto all thy commandments.
7 I will praise thee with uprightness of heart, when I shall have learned thy righteous judgments.
8 I will keep thy statutes: O forsake me not utterly

104 Through thy precepts I get understanding: therefore I hate every false way.
105 Thy word is a lamp unto my feet, and a light unto my path.
106 I have sworn, and I will perform it, that I will keep thy righteous judgments."

Christians know by faith that you cannot attack God whilst receiving these HIS statutes and precepts.