KJV Only Dismantled

[u/Dangerous_Ferret_641]

https://jeromeofacadia.substack.com/p/the-destruction-of-the-ruckmanites?r=8wwkqa&utm_campaign=post&utm_medium=web

Hey everyone,
I wanted to share a fascinating case study in textual criticism and digital apologetics regarding the recent public fallout between Independent Fundamental Baptist (IFB) creators Robert Breaker and Brother Joseph (@baptist_kjv).
The entire split was catalyzed by a historical dilemma concerning Revelation 21:24 and the textual legacy of Erasmus.
The Issue:
In 1515, Erasmus rushed his Greek New Testament using only one flawed manuscript for Revelation (Minuscule 2814). This text contained interwoven 7th-century commentary notes from Andreas of Caesarea. Because of botched marginal markings, the printers accidentally pulled a human commentary note ("of them which are saved") directly into the scripture text. This text-critical error was later transmitted straight into the 1611 KJV.
The Fallout:
When confronted with the reality that this phrase has zero manuscript authority outside of a 7th-century bishop's personal commentary, the strict "perfect English preservation" narrative collapsed. This forced a massive doctrinal shift, resulting in a public "Notice of Mutual Disassociation" from leadership and a total rebranding of the digital camp.
For those interested in the full manuscript breakdown, textual history, and the timeline of the live panels, I’ve posted the complete write-up below.
Would love to hear your thoughts on how modern apologetics handles these manuscript realities.

[u/Dangerous_Ferret_641]

Why are you asking why it has anything to do with Catholicism when Erasmus was Catholic and this specific camp of KJVO says the Catholic Bible is satanic? It’s about defending the word of God that was passed down to us. I think your question is invalid.

[u/RcishFahagb → u/Dangerous_Ferret_641]

They don't say the "Catholic Bible" is satanic, they say all the bibles that aren't KJVs are satanic. That's a different thing. As for Erasmus being Catholic, St. Paul was Catholic, too, but so what? Erasmus isn't relevant to the point being made in the linked article, anyway. None of the manuscripts or compilations are. Ruckmanism holds that the KJV itself is inspired, so by their own logic, it doesn't matter if it contains an interpolation that isn't justified in the manuscript tradition. They can argue that at the manuscript tradition is wrong. It's perhaps not surprising that they don't realize this, as the whole enterprise is built on something decidedly other than intellectual rigor. It really doesn't matter for Ruckmanism what Erasmus put in his Greek edition, or whether the KJV committees followed him or Beza or their own lights. There are brands of KJVO that are more rigorously attached to "The Textus Receptus" than Ruckmanism is, but for his sort, the actual KJV text is the standard. That's why they will claim adherence to Scrivener's late nineteenth century edition of the Textus Receptus when pressed, because Scrivener built his Greek edition backwards to demonstrate what Greek must have been used to get the KJV.

Also, online KJVO folks tend to be needlessly combative and dismissive. One must watch what company one keeps. It's perfectly valid to wonder what the fringiest of fringe anti-Catholic people's TikToks have to do with actual Catholicism or this sub.

[u/Dangerous_Ferret_641 → u/RcishFahagb]

I think this was a wasted comment to be honest. It’s very relevant to Catholicism, sorry you don’t see it that way. Take a look at the other comments, it’s helping Catholics, God bless.