Paul said that we should all speak the same things. That is impossible with a multitude of new versions, which even change over time.

[logos1560]

So are you saying that God Almighty could have produced His word without errors but purposefully chose to produce it with errors?

God did not produce His word with errors. You seem to try to blame God for the fact that He gave men free will so that they can sin and do wrong.

God gave to men the responsibility to copy the Scriptures according to His instructions--without adding, without omitting, and without changing any words, but imperfect men have failed to obey those instructions perfectly.

God did not choose to provide an absolutely perfect Bible translation without any errors in every language. God chose to give the Scriptures in the original languages by direct inspiration to the prophets and apostles. In order to carry out the Great Commission, believers have translated those original-language Scriptures into other languages. The word of God had been translated into English many years before 1611.

Do you in effect blame or condemn God because those pre-1611 English Bibles were not without error?
Do you make God directly responsible for the actual proven errors in the 1611 edition of the KJV?

KJV-only advocates inconsistently try to suggest that God had to perform miracles to keep the KJV translators from making any mistakes, but then contradicting themselves by suggesting that God was unable to keep the printers from making and introducing any mistakes.

Where do the Scriptures actually assert that God has to give you something that He did not give English-speaking believers before 1611?

None of the verses that you cite assert that the KJV is without error. You fail to apply those same verses justly to before 1611.

The KJV is the word of God translated into English in the same sense (univocally) as the pre-1611 English Bibles are the word of God translated into English.

 

[SavedByTheLord]

God did not produce His word with errors. You seem to try to blame God for the fact that He gave men free will so that they can sin and do wrong.

God gave to men the responsibility to copy the Scriptures according to His instructions--without adding, without omitting, and without changing any words, but imperfect men have failed to obey those instructions perfectly.

God did not choose to provide an absolutely perfect Bible translation without any errors in every language. God chose to give the Scriptures in the original languages by direct inspiration to the prophets and apostles. In order to carry out the Great Commission, believers have translated those original-language Scriptures into other languages. The word of God had been translated into English many years before 1611.

Do you in effect blame or condemn God because those pre-1611 English Bibles were not without error?
Do you make God directly responsible for the actual proven errors in the 1611 edition of the KJV?

KJV-only advocates inconsistently try to suggest that God had to perform miracles to keep the KJV translators from making any mistakes, but then contradicting themselves by suggesting that God was unable to keep the printers from making and introducing any mistakes.

Where do the Scriptures actually assert that God has to give you something that He did not give English-speaking believers before 1611?

None of the verses that you cite assert that the KJV is without error. You fail to apply those same verses justly to before 1611.

The KJV is the word of God translated into English in the same sense (univocally) as the pre-1611 English Bibles are the word of God translated into English.

But that means that there is no word of God in the world today without errors.

And yet,

Christ said

Heaven and earth shall pass away, but my words shall not pass away. in Matt 24:35, Mark 13:31 and Luke 21:33

The word of God also says,

God that cannot lie - Titus 1:2

Thy word is truth - John 17:17

Grace and truth came by Jesus Christ - John 1:14

Full of grace and truth - John 1:17

Evil men and seducers .... deceiving and being deceived - 2 Tim 3:13

Let God be true and every man a liar - Romans 3:4

No lie is of the truth - 1 John 2:22

All liars ... lake of fire - Rev 21:8

Speaking the truth in love - Eph 4:15

God give them repentance ... acknowledging of the truth ... snare of the devil - 2 Tim 2:25-26

Love one another, for this ... Thou shall not bear false witness - Romans 13:8-9

False accusers - 2 Tim 3:3

All scripture is given by inspiration of God - 2 Tim 3:16

Holy men of God spake as they were moved by the Holy Ghost - 2 Pet 1:21

Holy Spirit ... Spirit of truth ... guide you into all truth - John 16:13

The fruit of the Spirit is in all ... truth - Eph 5:9

Thou shall not bear false witness - Mark 10:9

Doctrines of devils ... speaking lies in hypocrisy - 1 Tim 4:1-2

Hast found them liars - Rev 2:2

Under falsehood have they hid themselves - Isa 28:15

No wise enter into it ... Make a lie - Rev 21:27

For without ... Loveth and maketh the a lie - Rev 22:15

Received not the love of the truth - 2 Thess 2:10

God shall send them strong delusion that they believe a lie - 2 Thess 2:11

The true worshippers shall worship the Father in spirit and in truth - John 4:23

God is a Spirit and they that worship Him must worship Him in spirit and in truth - John 4:24

Ye are of your father the devil, and the lusts of your father ye will do. He was a murderer from the beginning, and abode not in the truth, because there is no truth in him. When he speaketh a lie, he speaketh of his own: for he is a liar, and the father of it - John 8:44

Have I become your enemy because I tell you the truth - Gal 4:16

Jesus saith unto him, I am the way, the truth, and the life: no man cometh unto the Father, but by me. - John 14:6

Turned their ears from the truth ... turned unto fables 2 Tim 4:4

The Spirit of truth - John 14:17

The Spirit of truth - John 15:26

Rejoiceth in the truth - 1 Cor 13:6

A faithful witness will not lie: but a false witness will utter lies. - Prov 14:5

Wherefore putting away lying, speak every man truth with his neighbour: for we are members one of another. - Eph 4:25

Loins girt about with truth - Eph 6:14

That they all might be damned who believed not the truth, but had pleasure in unrighteousness. - 2 Thess 2:12

Study to shew thyself approved unto God, a workman that needeth not to be ashamed, rightly dividing the word of truth. - 2 Tim 2:15

That we henceforth be no more children, tossed to and fro, and carried about with every wind of doctrine, by the sleight of men, and cunning craftiness, whereby they lie in wait to deceive; - Eph 4:14

Prove all things - 1 Thess 5:21

Abstain from all appearance of evil - 1 Thess 5:22

To the law and to the testimony: if they speak not according to this word, it is because there is no light in them. - Isaiah 8:20

 

[logos1560]

But that means that there is no word of God in the world today without errors.

Perhaps your assertion is the result of your own inconsistent, erroneous reasoning. You do not demonstrate or prove any of my statements to be not-true. You simply try to dismiss the truth with your inconsistent opinion.

According to a consistent, just application of your own statements, you suggest that there was no word of God in English in the world without errors before 1610 or even before 1769. Your erroneous reasoning seems to suggest that the word of God without error had passed away before 1769, but that it was perhaps re-given in 1769. Are you blind to seeing the serious inconsistencies in your KJV-only nonsense?

 

[logos1560]

Does a multitude of varying editions of the KJV promote a violation of 1 Corinthians 1:10 according to a consistent application of typical human KJV-only reasoning?

In my first-hand examination of over 500 editions of the KJV, I could probably identify over 100 editions and perhaps over 200 that have some differences or variations with other KJV editions. These editions would not be every word the same with each other. These varying editions of the KJV do not present or speak every word the same.

KJV editions in the 1600's are not every word the same as typical KJV editions in the 1700's.

There were varying editions of the KJV in the 1600's with a good number of differences between the 1611 edition, the 1629 Cambridge edition, the 1638 Cambridge edition, the 1660 London edition, the 1675 Oxford edition, the 1679 Oxford edition. The 1660 London edition introduced some of the editing/revising changes that would later be reintroduced in the 1743 Cambridge.

There were also varying editions of the KJV in the 1700's. The 1743 Cambridge edition introduced many changes and revisions to the KJV, and its text was followed by some other printers. The 1769 Oxford edition introduced a different set of changes and revisions to the KJV. Surprising, Oxford University Press continued to print a KJV edition that was similar to that in the 1743/1762 Cambridge for several years after 1769. Oxford did not start following its own 1769 Oxford edition until around 1784.

There were also varying editions of the KJV in the 1800's. At some point likely in the early 1800‘s, Cambridge departed from that Oxford standard [especially in its 1816 and 1817 editions] before later returning to a revised edition of it. David Norton indicated that the text in this 1817 Cambridge edition “goes back at least as far as 1805” (Textual History, pp. 125-126). Norton noted: “It is an eclectic combination of old and new work that is most interesting for the number of 1611 readings it restores” (p. 126). Norton also pointed out that “in places some of Blayney’s readings appear” (p. 126). In another book, Norton wrote: “On occasions a great deal of work was done on the text with no fanfare at all. By 1805, for instance, Cambridge had revised its text, restoring a number of 1611 readings, but it is not clear what principles lay behind this work, nor who did it” (KJB: A Short History, pp. 173-174). A KJV that Cambridge published for the British and Foreign Bible Society and identified as being printed in 1812 has this same text. The text of a KJV edition printed in Albany, New York, in 1816 and of a KJV edition printed in New York by Collins and Company in 1816 provide additional evidence that this text goes back before 1817. Someone took some time and effort in the editing and making of the text that served as the basis for this 1805/1817 Cambridge edition. Evidently, three or more earlier KJV editions were compared and consulted in its making. For the period that Cambridge printed this stereotype edition [likely from 1805 until 1818 or 1819], it served as a Cambridge standard. This KJV text served as a Cambridge standard for a longer period [14 years] than the earlier 1629 Cambridge edition had been [9 years]. This is a Cambridge standard edition and revision overlooked or ignored by KJV-only authors. Facts from a KJV edition in John Brown’s Self-Interpreting Bible printed in London in 1821 show that it followed much of the same KJV text as that in this 1805/1817 Cambridge edition. Facts from some American editions of the KJV (such as Phinney’s Stereotype Edition, Holbrook’s Stereotype edition, and Harding’s Fine Edition) indicate that they have been influenced by the same KJV text that was the basis for this 1805/1817 Cambridge edition. A KJV edition printed in 1827 in New York by Daniel Smith and stereotyped by J. Howe and a KJV edition printed in 1835 in Philadelphia by Alexander Toward also may have been influenced by it. These KJV editions in the early 1800’s would suggest that the 1769 Oxford edition was not firmly established as the standard or was not yet known or recognized as the standard by all printers of the KJV. In 1873, Scrivener would also introduce his Cambridge edition of the KJV that has many differences with typical other KJV editions.

 

[SavedByTheLord]

Does a multitude of varying editions of the KJV promote a violation of 1 Corinthians 1:10 according to a consistent application of typical human KJV-only reasoning?

In my first-hand examination of over 500 editions of the KJV, I could probably identify over 100 editions and perhaps over 200 that have some differences or variations with other KJV editions. These editions would not be every word the same with each other. These varying editions of the KJV do not present or speak every word the same.

KJV editions in the 1600's are not every word the same as typical KJV editions in the 1700's.

There were varying editions of the KJV in the 1600's with a good number of differences between the 1611 edition, the 1629 Cambridge edition, the 1638 Cambridge edition, the 1660 London edition, the 1675 Oxford edition, the 1679 Oxford edition. The 1660 London edition introduced some of the editing/revising changes that would later be reintroduced in the 1743 Cambridge.

There were also varying editions of the KJV in the 1700's. The 1743 Cambridge edition introduced many changes and revisions to the KJV, and its text was followed by some other printers. The 1769 Oxford edition introduced a different set of changes and revisions to the KJV. Surprising, Oxford University Press continued to print a KJV edition that was similar to that in the 1743/1762 Cambridge for several years after 1769. Oxford did not start following its own 1769 Oxford edition until around 1784.

There were also varying editions of the KJV in the 1800's. At some point likely in the early 1800‘s, Cambridge departed from that Oxford standard [especially in its 1816 and 1817 editions] before later returning to a revised edition of it. David Norton indicated that the text in this 1817 Cambridge edition “goes back at least as far as 1805” (Textual History, pp. 125-126). Norton noted: “It is an eclectic combination of old and new work that is most interesting for the number of 1611 readings it restores” (p. 126). Norton also pointed out that “in places some of Blayney’s readings appear” (p. 126). In another book, Norton wrote: “On occasions a great deal of work was done on the text with no fanfare at all. By 1805, for instance, Cambridge had revised its text, restoring a number of 1611 readings, but it is not clear what principles lay behind this work, nor who did it” (KJB: A Short History, pp. 173-174). A KJV that Cambridge published for the British and Foreign Bible Society and identified as being printed in 1812 has this same text. The text of a KJV edition printed in Albany, New York, in 1816 and of a KJV edition printed in New York by Collins and Company in 1816 provide additional evidence that this text goes back before 1817. Someone took some time and effort in the editing and making of the text that served as the basis for this 1805/1817 Cambridge edition. Evidently, three or more earlier KJV editions were compared and consulted in its making. For the period that Cambridge printed this stereotype edition [likely from 1805 until 1818 or 1819], it served as a Cambridge standard. This KJV text served as a Cambridge standard for a longer period [14 years] than the earlier 1629 Cambridge edition had been [9 years]. This is a Cambridge standard edition and revision overlooked or ignored by KJV-only authors. Facts from a KJV edition in John Brown’s Self-Interpreting Bible printed in London in 1821 show that it followed much of the same KJV text as that in this 1805/1817 Cambridge edition. Facts from some American editions of the KJV (such as Phinney’s Stereotype Edition, Holbrook’s Stereotype edition, and Harding’s Fine Edition) indicate that they have been influenced by the same KJV text that was the basis for this 1805/1817 Cambridge edition. A KJV edition printed in 1827 in New York by Daniel Smith and stereotyped by J. Howe and a KJV edition printed in 1835 in Philadelphia by Alexander Toward also may have been influenced by it. These KJV editions in the early 1800’s would suggest that the 1769 Oxford edition was not firmly established as the standard or was not yet known or recognized as the standard by all printers of the KJV. In 1873, Scrivener would also introduce his Cambridge edition of the KJV that has many differences with typical other KJV editions.

Just the 1769 Blayney edition.

According to this source here are over 1/2 of the printing errors.

Changes to the KJV since 1611: An Illustration | Bible.org

Recently a reader of the BSF web site sent this letter to me (and presumably to several of his friends as well): Daniel Wallace is a noted Greek scholar and professor of New Testament at Dallas Theological Seminary. In his paper entitled “Why So Many Versions?” Wallace makes the following...

bible.org

Out of the 421 total changes amounting to only five one-hundredths of a percent, the following should be noted -

TOWARDS has been changed to TOWARD 14 times.

BURNT has been changed to BURNED 31 times.

AMONGST has been changed to AMONG 36 times.

LIFT has been changed to LIFTED 51 times.

YOU has been changed to YE 82 times.

of course many new versions say Christ sinned, lied or did not know the future, that He had an origin,
They remove many proofs Christ is God, all works for salvation, say someone can disown Christ, that someone can lose salvation.
They say idolatry is very religious, that promote fornication, false witness, abortion, murder, doctrines of devils, remove the resurrection in mark 16:9-20, and other corruptions.

Reminds be of this.

Ye blind guides, which strain at a gnat, and swallow a camel. - Matt 23:24

 

[logos1560]

Just the 1769 Blayney edition.

According to this source here are over 1/2 of the printing errors.


Out of the 421 total changes amounting to only five one-hundredths of a percent, the following should be noted -

Your outdated, unreliable source is wrong as was already pointed out to you. You repeat the same incorrect information.

 

[SavedByTheLord]

Your outdated, unreliable source is wrong as was already pointed out to you. You repeat the same incorrect information.

Please list all errors in the Blayney edition.
Here is the info and that comes to a total of 214 out of 421 or over 1/2 in the very first writing of the KJB in 1611.

Out of the 421 total changes amounting to only five one-hundredths of a percent, the following should be noted -

TOWARDS has been changed to TOWARD 14 times.

BURNT has been changed to BURNED 31 times.

AMONGST has been changed to AMONG 36 times.

LIFT has been changed to LIFTED 51 times.

YOU has been changed to YE 82 times.

Of course many new versions say Christ sinned, lied or did not know the future, that He had an origin, and accuse Him of being the fallen being in Isa 14:!2.
They remove many proofs Christ is God, hint of works for salvation, say someone can disown Christ, and that someone can lose salvation.
They say idolatry is very religious, that promote fornication, false witness, abortion, murder, doctrines of devils, remove the resurrection in mark 16:9-20, and other corruptions.

Reminds be of this.

Ye blind guides, which strain at a gnat, and swallow a camel. - Matt 23:24

 

[shroom]

Of course many new versions say Christ sinned, lied

What new versions say that?

 

[SavedByTheLord]

What new versions say that?

Many new versions make a change to John 7:8 that indicate that either Christ lied or did not know the future. But Christ never sinned.

Here is the King James Bible. In verse 8 Christ said “yet”. In verse 10, He then went to the up to the feast. But many new versions remove the word “yet”. So, that would mean that Jesus Christ lied or did not know the future. That is not the real Jesus Christ. Christ knows all things, never lied, and never sinned. By the way, this is not the only time that some new versions accuse Christ of sin.

8 Go ye up unto this feast: I go not up yet unto this feast: for my time is not yet full come. 9 When he had said these words unto them, he abode still in Galilee. 10 But when his brethren were gone up, then went he also up unto the feast, not openly, but as it were in secret. – John 7:8-10

For we have not an high priest which cannot be touched with the feeling of our infirmities; but was in all points tempted like as we are, yet without sin. – Hebrews 4:15

The ESV, NIV, NET, NASB, NASB 1995, CSB, HCSB, and the NIRV are some of the ones that have removed "yet"

Don't use any Bible that removes "yet" from "I of not up yet to the this feast".

 

[shroom]

Many new versions make a change to John 7:8 that indicate that either Christ lied or did not know the future. But Christ never sinned.

Here is the King James Bible. In verse 8 Christ said “yet”. In verse 10, He then went to the up to the feast. But many new versions remove the word “yet”. So, that would mean that Jesus Christ lied or did not know the future. That is not the real Jesus Christ. Christ knows all things, never lied, and never sinned. By the way, this is not the only time that some new versions accuse Christ of sin.

8 Go ye up unto this feast: I go not up yet unto this feast: for my time is not yet full come. 9 When he had said these words unto them, he abode still in Galilee. 10 But when his brethren were gone up, then went he also up unto the feast, not openly, but as it were in secret. – John 7:8-10

For we have not an high priest which cannot be touched with the feeling of our infirmities; but was in all points tempted like as we are, yet without sin. – Hebrews 4:15

The ESV, NIV, NET, NASB, NASB 1995, CSB, HCSB, and the NIRV are some of the ones that have removed "yet"

Don't use any Bible that removes "yet" from "I of not up yet to the this feast".

You're a trip.

 

[SavedByTheLord]

You're a trip.

Thanks

 

[Theo1689]

You're a trip.

Like I said... He did too much LDS at Berkeley...

 

[SavedByTheLord]

Like I said... He did too much LDS at Berkeley...

Not me.
I have a sound mind.

For God hath not given us the spirit of fear; but of power, and of love, and of a sound mind. - 2 Tim 1:7

 

[logos1560]

I have a sound mind.

Sadly, your posts fail to demonstrate it. Some of your stated reasoning in your posts is not sound.

Some of your statements would also depend upon fallacies such as begging the question where you assume a premise to be true when it has not been proven to be actually true.

 

[glenlogie]

Not me.
I have a sound mind.

For God hath not given us the spirit of fear; but of power, and of love, and of a sound mind. - 2 Tim 1:7

We need to see the psychological reports in order to believe that

 

[SavedByTheLord]

We need to see the psychological reports in order to believe that

Thanks
you are funny sometimes.

 

[logos1560]

Here is the info and that comes to a total of 214 out of 421 or over 1/2 in the very first writing of the KJB in 1611.

You repeat the same factually inaccurate information. There is not a total of only 421 differences since there are actually over 2,000 differences. Even D. A. Waite himself, who first claimed the 421 count in 1985, later revised his count up to 1,095, but even his new count is still incorrect.
KJV-only author David Cloud acknowledged Waite's new count of 1,095 that replaced his old incorrect count of 421 as he wrote: “Waite found only 1,095 changes that affect the sound” (Answering the Myths, p. 79).

Is David Cloud in effect admitting that Waite’s earlier 1985 research was not as diligent, exhaustive, and complete as he had claimed and that it did not actually tally and categorize every change?
Does David Cloud explain why he so strongly praised and recommended this 1985 research with its 421 count that was less than 50% accurate?

This new count of 1095 is still inaccurate, but it does at least prove that the 421 count was less than 50% accurate. That count of 421 includes less than 25% of the actual differences and changes that affect the sound.

In 1985, Waite had listed only 36 examples for his category of adding a word. According to more careful research, there were over 180 whole words not found in the 1611 edition that are added in a typical, post-1900 KJV edition. At one verse (Eccl. 8:17) which was overlooked by Waite, six whole words are added to the 1611. At nine verses (Lev. 26:40, Num. 7:31, Num. 7:55, Josh. 13:29, Jud. 1:31, 2 Kings 11:10, Ezek. 3:11, 2 Cor. 11:32, 2 Tim. 4:13), three whole words are added. In at least seventeen verses, two whole words are added (Exod. 15:25, Exod. 21:32, Exod. 35:11, Lev. 10:34, Lev. 26:23, Deut. 26:1, 1 Sam. 18:27, Ezra 4:11, Ezek. 34:31, John 7:16, 1 Cor. 14:15, 1 Cor. 15:41, 2 Cor. 9:5, 2 Cor. 9:6, 1 John 5:12, Rev. 1:4, Rev. 5:13). At over one hundred twenty verses, one whole word is added to the 1611 (Gen. 19:21, Gen. 22:7, Gen. 36:14, Exod. 26:8, Exod. 34:25, Lev. 7:23, Lev. 11:3, Lev. 14:54, Lev. 18:3, Lev. 20:11, Num. 9:13, Num. 20:5, Deut. 4:25, Deut. 4:32, Deut. 5:29, Deut. 9:10, Deut. 20:7, Deut. 24:10, etc.). Do KJV-only advocates close their eyes to these verifiable facts?

 

[SavedByTheLord]

You repeat the same factually inaccurate information. There is not a total of only 421 differences since there are actually over 2,000 differences. Even D. A. Waite himself, who first claimed the 421 count in 1985, later revised his count up to 1,095, but even his new count is still incorrect.
KJV-only author David Cloud acknowledged Waite's new count of 1,095 that replaced his old incorrect count of 421 as he wrote: “Waite found only 1,095 changes that affect the sound” (Answering the Myths, p. 79).

Is David Cloud in effect admitting that Waite’s earlier 1985 research was not as diligent, exhaustive, and complete as he had claimed and that it did not actually tally and categorize every change?
Does David Cloud explain why he so strongly praised and recommended this 1985 research with its 421 count that was less than 50% accurate?

This new count of 1095 is still inaccurate, but it does at least prove that the 421 count was less than 50% accurate. That count of 421 includes less than 25% of the actual differences and changes that affect the sound.

In 1985, Waite had listed only 36 examples for his category of adding a word. According to more careful research, there were over 180 whole words not found in the 1611 edition that are added in a typical, post-1900 KJV edition. At one verse (Eccl. 8:17) which was overlooked by Waite, six whole words are added to the 1611. At nine verses (Lev. 26:40, Num. 7:31, Num. 7:55, Josh. 13:29, Jud. 1:31, 2 Kings 11:10, Ezek. 3:11, 2 Cor. 11:32, 2 Tim. 4:13), three whole words are added. In at least seventeen verses, two whole words are added (Exod. 15:25, Exod. 21:32, Exod. 35:11, Lev. 10:34, Lev. 26:23, Deut. 26:1, 1 Sam. 18:27, Ezra 4:11, Ezek. 34:31, John 7:16, 1 Cor. 14:15, 1 Cor. 15:41, 2 Cor. 9:5, 2 Cor. 9:6, 1 John 5:12, Rev. 1:4, Rev. 5:13). At over one hundred twenty verses, one whole word is added to the 1611 (Gen. 19:21, Gen. 22:7, Gen. 36:14, Exod. 26:8, Exod. 34:25, Lev. 7:23, Lev. 11:3, Lev. 14:54, Lev. 18:3, Lev. 20:11, Num. 9:13, Num. 20:5, Deut. 4:25, Deut. 4:32, Deut. 5:29, Deut. 9:10, Deut. 20:7, Deut. 24:10, etc.). Do KJV-only advocates close their eyes to these verifiable facts?

Why again the post-1900 edition?

The 1769 is the one.

Please prove a single error in the 1769 KJB,

 

[SovereignGrace]

Paul said that we should all speak the same things. That is impossible with a multitude of new versions, which even change over time.

Now I beseech you, brethren, by the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, that ye all speak the same thing, and that there be no divisions among you; but that ye be perfectly joined - 1 Cor 1:10

Just think, for better than 1,000 years, Jerome’s Latin Vulgate was the church’s Bible. Then the KJV came along and muddied up the H2O.

 

[logos1560]

Why again the post-1900 edition?

The 1769 is the one.

You are misinformed and uninformed about editions of the KJV. You use a post-1900 edition of the KJV, not the 1769 Oxford edition. The truth has been pointed out to you before, but you close your eyes to it or reject it.

There are likely as many as 400 differences between the actual 1769 Oxford edition of the KJV and the post-1900 edition of the KJV that you likely read.