Send us Fan Mail

Weighed in the Balance helps Christians evaluate arguments and discern truth. In an age of well-produced, eloquently spoken, and highly persuasive claims, this channel asks a simple question: Is this true?

In this episode, we continue analyzing the debate between Nathan Cravatt and Mitch Canupp, focusing on a critical question: Which manuscript tradition is most trustworthy?

But as the discussion unfolds, a deeper issue emerges: inconsistency.

Can the arguments for King James Onlyism be applied universally? Or do they collapse under their own weight?

We explore:

• Lower vs. higher criticism
• Internal vs. external evidence
• The “law of first mention”
• The claim that “Egypt = bad”
• Why inconsistency may undermine the entire position

Ultimately, this episode isn’t just about Bible translations—it’s about learning how to evaluate arguments carefully and honestly.

👍 Like, comment, and subscribe for more thoughtful theological analysis.

Support the show

Do you think this claim is found wanting? Let us know on social!!

Click here to find us everywhere!!

Send a text

In this episode, we continue analyzing the 2021 debate on KJV-onlyism and examine two key passages—1 John 5:7 and Revelation 16:5—that raise serious challenges for the position.

While the King James Version remains a faithful and valuable translation, elevating it to the only acceptable English Bible creates major apologetic, theological, and interpretive problems. We also address common misconceptions about the New King James Version and its textual basis.

Quick clarification: While there are a few minor differences between the KJV and NKJV (such as “God” vs “Lord” in some places), these remain within the Textus Receptus tradition and do not indicate a shift to the Majority or Critical Text.

If you enjoy careful, charitable theological discussion, consider subscribing and joining the conversation in the comments.

Support the show

Do you think this claim is found wanting? Let us know on social!!

Click here to find us everywhere!!

Send a text

In this episode of Weighed in the Balance, we continue analyzing the debate between Nathan Cravatt and Mitch Canupp on King James Onlyism. By examining the different types of KJV-Only positions—from simple preference for the King James to claims that the KJV itself was re-inspired—we evaluate the arguments, evidence, and reasoning used in the debate.

Along the way we look at textual criticism, the Textus Receptus, numerics claims, and how to critically evaluate theological arguments.

If you enjoy careful and charitable theological discussions, consider subscribing and joining the conversation.

Mark Ward on False Friends in the KJV: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1awUlUOhwfI
Mark Ward on the language of the Westminster Standards: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZnsMXQGORrA

00:00 Introduction
01:04 The Debate Question
03:10 Why KJV-Onlyism Is a Shrinking Position
05:02 The Five Types of KJV-Onlyism
05:45 1. “KJV Is the Best Translation”
09:01 2. The Textual Argument
12:37 3. Textus Receptus Only
17:20 4. The Inspired KJV View
19:25 5. The “New Revelation” Position
23:00 Why the Debaters Talk Past Each Other
26:10 The “Perfect Line of Manuscripts” Claim
30:25 The 1611 vs 1769 KJV Issue
34:40 How KJV-Only Arguments Use “Things That Are Different…”
39:02 The Psalm 138 Translation Issue
44:16 Evaluating the Debate Arguments
47:40 Emotional Appeals vs Evidence
49:40 “The Language Got Purer and Purer” Claim
52:30 Numerics vs Numerology
57:00 The WWII Chapter-Verse Claim
01:01:40 Misreading Romans Through Numerics
01:05:30 Erasmus and Codex Vaticanus
01:07:00 Is English the Closest Language to Hebrew?
01:09:10 Moderator Intervention

Support the show

Do you think this claim is found wanting? Let us know on social!!

Click here to find us everywhere!!