Skip to main content
tags, phrasing improvement
Source Link
GratefulDisciple
  • 25.6k
  • 5
  • 37
  • 117

Are there any advocates of "King James Bible Only" thattoday who use the original 1611 version?

Are there any advocates of "King James Bible Only" that usetoday who insist using only the original 1611 version? What reasons do they give? For example, do they reject the Young Literal Translation that is also faithful to Textus Receptus?

The real old English is extremely hard to understand.

Are there any advocates of "King James Bible Only" that use the original 1611 version?

Are there any advocates of "King James Bible Only" that use the original 1611 version?

The real old English is extremely hard to understand.

Are there any advocates of "King James Bible Only" today who use the original 1611 version?

Are there any advocates of "King James Bible Only" today who insist using only the original 1611 version? What reasons do they give? For example, do they reject the Young Literal Translation that is also faithful to Textus Receptus?

The real old English is extremely hard to understand.

Source Link

Are there any advocates of "King James Bible Only" that use the original 1611 version?

Are there any advocates of "King James Bible Only" that use the original 1611 version?

The real old English is extremely hard to understand.