Let me state that I would probably sit at the shallow end of the KJVO mob, and I have a few issues with Sam Gipp's videos, but they are minor.
However, I have just come across James White's "Criticism videos" of Sam Gipp's Big Deal about the KJV videos.
I have to say though, that James White's attempt to discredit the videos is amazing in it's rambling, misleading, and rabbit trail following nature.
In the first instance, in videos one he spends a fair bit of time basically just saying that anyone who is KJVO is wrong because they are wrong. The first five minutes he says nothing about the video, but simply attacks the position with unsubstantiated broad statements.
At one point he makes the point that the "other" line of texts has the "oldest manuscripts", but gives no support for that. Having done a little research on this particular subject, I know that there is actually no evidence of the age of either codex Vaticanus, nor of Codex Siniaticus. They were "old" when found, but one was found in the 1500's (Vaticanus) and the other was not heard of or referenced in any way before 1761.
So these apparently "oldest and best" manuscripts can not be positively identified as any other than "old" when discovered in the 1500's or the 1800's (Tischendorf found it in 1844, it was possibly referred to in some writing in 1761. These facts came from the official websites of Vaticanus and Sinaiticus. The point of this is that his own claim to "oldest manuscripts" is based heavily on assumption and guesses.
Secondly, James White criticises Dr. Gipp for talking about "Two Bibles", which Dr. Gipp goes on to explain in his video, and which is a simplistic representation, but Later in video one of James White he actually agrees that the KJV and NKJV are from one stream and all the others are from the other stream - so he then uses that two stream argument against the KJV while he critises the use of it FOR the KJV.
He makes big about Gipp using the name "Critical text" as though it is a bad thing, but Dr. Gipp is using it as an identifier - I don't think Dr. Gipp was using the word "Critical" in the way that James White suggests - maybe I have missed something there....... (He mentions once that the "Name" "should tell you something", and then moves straight on - this is a minor line given, not a major point as White presents it.
White makes a huge point about the "Textus Receptus" which he says didn't even exist in that form until 1633 (I think that was the date he said), and he makes big about the point that the TR that he was holding was translated into Greek from English that had been translated From Greek. So what? What has anything written after the translation process was long completed got to do with the translation into English of the KJV? This is a huge Rabbit Trail - or is that red herring - that White includes for the sake of presenting a FALSE disparagement of the Textus Receptus. This is in my opinion, simply DISHONEST. When Sam Gipp talks of the TR, he is talking of the Manuscript Group that the translators used in the work of the KJV, not the Greek complied text done after that work was finished. And James White KNOWS THIS - this is why it is dishonest.
Further to that James White also compares the production of the KJV to the production of the Quran, again presenting the information in a way that is clearly dishonest. He makes the point that there was a single version of the Quran that was imposed upon Muslims, and likens that to the KJVO matter.
This is dishonest for the fact that James White mentioned that it was pressed upon people by a single man, and there is no way to know which version was actually the true one. This ignores the facts that the KJV was not forced onto anyone, and it was translated by the greatest and most skillful group of
translators ever assembled. So yes, there may be one version of the Quran which was forced upon people and compiled by one man, but that has nothing to do with a Bible that was translated by more than 50 of the greatest translators ever assembled, and provided - not proscribed - for use by anyone who wanted to use it. That Bible - the KJV - became the most popular Bible version by far, not by force, but by love of the Word of God, and by recognition of the caliber of the work.
For James White to correlate the KJV with Quran in this way is dishonest in it's representation, and demeaning to the Word of God.
What James White's video does do is it shows his great intellect - in quoting so many (often irrelevant) facts, psuedo facts, and people of the past, he shows a great knowledge of quotations and displays his probably amazing memory. It also shows that he is not above twisting and misrepresenting facts and people in his quest to attack something which is not as far out of field as he desperately wants it to be.
There is a simple point of logic that shows that the existence of a true Bible must be found in a single edition or nowhere: When two things claim to be the perfect Word of God but they say different things, then at least one of them must be wrong. They could BOTH be wrong.
But they cannot BOTH BE RIGHT.
If you believe that the Bible is the true, preserved, inerrant Word of God then it must exist in one, and ONLY IN ONE version today. Which one is actually irrelevant to this point. But if we have God's Perfect Word today, then it must be in One version, not many, because every version says things different - some of them very differently.
If however you think that we don't have God's Perfect Word today, then go ahead, hold hands with James White and YOU try to figure out which parts of God's Word are actually God's Word.
As for me, I will believe God when He says that He Inspired the Word of God and will preserve it.
Mat 5:18 For verily I say unto you, Till heaven and earth pass, one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law, till all be fulfilled.
2Ti 3:16 All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness:
2Ti 3:17 That the man of God may be perfect, throughly furnished unto all good works.
Let me just ask this question: Why would God give His Word in such a special way and for such a special purpose, and then let it disappear into the haze of history?
