The King James Bible is the preserved Word of God.

A manuscript is a handwritten witness. A printed Greek edition is an editor’s reconstruction using witnesses. The received-text tradition has multiple editions; Westcott–Hort 1881 and Nestle–Aland are named critical editions. Scrivener 1894 reconstructs the Greek readings followed by the KJV; it was printed after 1611.

At 1 John 5:7–8, the received reading displayed in the Bible challenge includes the Father, Word and Holy Ghost as heavenly witnesses. Westcott–Hort has the shorter reading. The difference is in the Greek wording, not merely English style. The Byzantine majority reading is also shorter at this passage.

Victor of Vita preserves the Carthage confession of AD 484 appealing to the heavenly witnesses. This is ancient Latin testimony for the longer reading, more than a thousand years before the KJV. It supports the KJV case against a 1611 invention. Its relationship to John’s original Greek wording still needs examination.

GA 2427, known as “Archaic Mark”, was accepted as a manuscript witness before investigation exposed its modern production. The University of Chicago manuscript record links the scientific investigation. It contains Mark, not 1 John. A mistake in authenticating a witness deserves scrutiny, but must be connected to the actual reading being disputed.

Jehovah’s Witnesses state that Westcott and Hort’s 1881 text was the primary basis for their original New Testament translation. Their own account says the 2013 revision also consulted Nestle–Aland 28 and the United Bible Societies text. This is a documented textual connection; Greek source selection and English translation decisions remain separate questions.

Our conviction is that the KJV preserves God’s words. The challenge is to defend a reading using identifiable witnesses, context and a consistent standard. Manuscript age, number, geographical distribution, quotation history and possible copying explanations should be weighed, not turned into a single automatic rule. An editor’s beliefs can be investigated without assuming they prove a specific textual alteration.