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!!