Send us Fan Mail

Do modern Bible translations actually remove references to the blood of Christ?

And what about people who struggle to understand the KJV—don’t we want people to actually read and understand the Bible for themselves?

In this episode, we look at two major audience questions from the KJV Onlyism debate:

1. Should Christians be expected to read a Bible they cannot understand?
2. Are modern translations removing key doctrines by omitting phrases like “through His blood” in Colossians 1:14?

The goal is not just to possess a Bible—but to know God through His Word.

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

00:00 Introduction to Biblical Study

02:03 Understanding Scripture and Its Importance

06:43 The Role of the Holy Spirit in Understanding

17:00 Textual Variants and Their Implications

32:08 The Debate on King James Version vs. Modern Translations

Support the show

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

Click here to find us everywhere!!

Send us Fan Mail

In this episode of Weighed in the Balance, we continue working through audience questions from the Cravat–Canupp debate, focusing on King James Onlyism and textual criticism.

Can anything good come from Egypt? Should manuscripts be dismissed based on their origin? Did Origen corrupt the text of Scripture? And what exactly is textual criticism anyway?

We take a careful and charitable look at these questions, distinguishing between lower and higher criticism, addressing common misconceptions, and emphasizing why these issues matter for how we understand the Bible today.

My goal is not to attack, but to think clearly and faithfully about Scripture, history, and the tools God has given us to understand His Word.

If you enjoy thoughtful theological discussion, consider liking the video and subscribing.

📌 Let me know your thoughts in the comments:
– Should Egyptian manuscripts be dismissed?
– How do you understand textual criticism?
– Do translation differences affect doctrine?

00:00 Introduction to the Debate and Audience Questions

01:55 Critique of King James-Onlyism

07:36 Understanding Origen and Textual Criticism

14:23 Lower vs Higher Criticism in Textual Studies

24:54 Philosophy and Its Role in Theology

29:11 Examining Scriptural Citations and Errors

Support the show

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

Click here to find us everywhere!!

Send us Fan Mail

In this episode of Weighed in the Balance, we examine a common Roman Catholic objection: that sola scriptura is logically inconsistent.

But is that actually true?

Before responding to that claim, we lay out the positive case for sola scriptura, grounded in the Westminster Confession of Faith, and present a clear syllogistic argument:

• God alone is the final authority
• We access that authority through His Word
• God’s Word was given orally and in Scripture
• Oral revelation has ceased
• Therefore, Scripture is now the only access point to God’s final authority

From there, we evaluate whether objections to sola scriptura actually demonstrate a logical contradiction, or whether they simply challenge the truth of the premises.

We also interact with a video by Sean Hiller and examine several common misunderstandings of the doctrine.

00:00 Introduction to Sola Scriptura

01:18 The Positive Case for Sola Scriptura

05:02 Understanding Final Authority

07:57 Logical Consistency of Sola Scriptura

12:42 Addressing Objections to Sola Scriptura

17:48 The Role of Secondary Authorities

21:50 The Importance of Church Authority

25:11 Examining Mr. Hiller's Arguments

30:11 Clarifying Misunderstandings

34:11 Conclusion and Invitation for Discussion

Support the show

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

Click here to find us everywhere!!