A thought to ponder about KJVOism

I notice that W. B. Riley does not actually cite any authorities. At best, this means that then, as now, KJV-onlyism was the belief of a few insignificant cranks.

Hey, for all we know, he was thinking of the same Seventh-day Adventists that D. O. Fuller would plagiarize later. (I admit, it would give me no small sense of schadenfreude to find out that was true.)

 

It is sad when a outfit like the SDA has more discernment about the word of God than the "good,dedicated,godly scholars" that just want to "bring us closer to the originals."

Truly sad..

 

Lacy:

All this proves is that there were crackpots then as well as now. Undeniably, their audience was quite small.

When we speak of the KJVO myth today, we speak of the modern version that arose from Wilkinson's hooey-filled book that was largely copied by later authors. Maybe Wilkinson hadn't set out to create a whole new myth, but the fact is, today's myth is based upon his book.

The advertising power of the modern media has given a much-larger segment of the population exposure to the KJVO myth and its literature than was ever possible before radio & TV existed. Thus, they helped establish the modern myth.

Here's an example of the glam ads employed to whitewash the garbage dumpsters of modern KJVO literature:
http://www.avpublications.com/3_catalogue/nabv/nabv.htm

Please read it closely to see the OUTRIGHT LIES this ad contains! See how easily it could fool someone who doesn't know any better!

 

Anti_Alexandrian:It is sad when a outfit like the SDA has more discernment about the word of God than the "good,dedicated,godly scholars" that just want to "bring us closer to the originals."

Truly sad..

Yes, it IS...especially since even that cult has abandoned KJVO, while some Baptists continue in it!

 

No, it also proves that there were KJVOs prior to 1930, which was the question of this thread.

Go back just s few more years and the issue becomes moot because just about everyone carrying an English Bible was carrying a KJV. Those early crackpots had seen plenty of fruit out of that old book.


Lacy


BTW. The Bible says:

Click Verse for Commentary Notes

Mt 5:20 -
For I say unto you, That except your righteousness shall exceed the righteousness of the scribes and Pharisees, ye shall in no case enter into the kingdom of heaven.

Perhaps we as blood bought, Spirit-filled believers might benefit from striving to exceed the (outward) righteousness of those 7th-Day Pharasies. I doubt they got everything wrong. It's kind of hard to keep a cult going without ANY truth. Seeds and watermelon! Seeds and watermelon!

 

Ever notice how that just because some can't answer it doesn't mean there is not an answer.

Lacy

BTW Where did you go? I answered.

 

Anti-Alexandrian said:

It is sad when a outfit like the SDA has more discernment about the word of God than the "good,dedicated,godly scholars" that just want to "bring us closer to the originals."

Then when we get to the KJV-onlyists, we're really scraping the dregs off the bottom of the barrel . . .

 

Lacy Evans:No, it also proves that there were KJVOs prior to 1930, which was the question of this thread.

I don't deny there were KJVOs in some form in 1612. But that's all water over the dam now.

Go back just s few more years and the issue becomes moot because just about everyone carrying an English Bible was carrying a KJV. Those early crackpots had seen plenty of fruit out of that old book.


Lacy

Go back a few more years & just about every english Bible reader was carrying a GENEVA BIBLE. Those earlier chackpots saw no reason to change their Bible either, but KJ & Bancroft did.


BTW. The Bible says:

Click Verse for Commentary Notes

Mt 5:20 -
For I say unto you, That except your righteousness shall exceed the righteousness of the scribes and Pharisees, ye shall in no case enter into the kingdom of heaven.

Jesus was being a bit sarcastic here. He, and most of His audience, knew those Pharisees were as about as righteous as a soccer ball.

Perhaps we as blood bought, Spirit-filled believers might benefit from striving to exceed the (outward) righteousness of those 7th-Day Pharasies. I doubt they got everything wrong. It's kind of hard to keep a cult going without ANY truth. Seeds and watermelon! Seeds and watermelon!

Know whatcha git when you feed a rat 98% corn meal & 2% Warfarin? A dead rat! The purpose of rat poison is to kill rats, but it must be able to entice them to eat it. The purpose of the SDA is to perpetuate a cult begun by Ellen Gould White, but it must have something attractive to lure people into it. If it was totally a lie, it would have few, if any, adherents. Same with KJVO-pretty on the outside, full of trash inside.

 

Exactly why I read, trust, and never correct the Bible. Exactly why I am KJV only. 98%! That's funny. You could measure the leaven in MVs using double digit fractions. (Of course things that are way different are the same as things that are so similar that you would have to measure the differences in Parts Per Million.) Happy eating whiskers!

Same with "no-doctrine-is-affected-except-whichever-one-we-are-discussing-and-the-"greek"-or-some-other-translation-makes-it-say-what-I-want" Modern Version Position.

I think you know what would happen if we compared trash heaps. I've seen the fruit of ONE BOOK. (You have too when you were courageous enough to look.) It is not even close. I could give you a 99 meter head start in a 100 meter race and still obliderate you in a race if the KJVs fruit were my running and the MVs' fruit were yours. You talk about "trash". Document the trash.

Lacy

 

Sorry, Lacy, but I can't live online. I have to work, sleep, attend church, eat...

Hmmm. Posting a link is answering? But I did check it out. Just don't really see the relevance of it. I had no doubt that there have been people who total believed that their Bible was 100% accurate and inspired. And of course it was the KJV back then, since there wasn't much to choose from.

Rat poison? Hey, that cake was for my mother-in-law...oh, uh, oops.

As for fruit, I agree that the KJV has borne a lot of it. After all, with a four hundred year headstart, it had better have had some kind of a crop, even if some of it is nuts .

Now, if you were to compare the fruit of the KJV against the fruit of, say, the NIV on a year by year basis, starting from the date of publication, you would be surprised. The KJV came forth slowly, as they were printed, and as all other translations were confiscated. The NIV burst forth with media coverage and mass publication. So, how much fruit did the KJV produce it's first thirty years, as compared to the NIV's first thiry?

But, that doesn't really matter. What matters is that the fruit is souls that are saved from hell. Now if we could just get all these KJVOlators to quit strapping all these requirements on along with the free gift ("Thou shalt readeth no other version other than the holy KJV", "Thou shalt learn to read Olde English, and teacheth the fruit of thy loins the same", yada, yada, yada).

In Christ,
Trotter

 

Lacy Evans:Exactly why I read, trust, and never correct the Bible.

I know; it was already done for you in 1604-1611 by a committee of Anglicans who didn't like the perfectly-legit Bible made by Calvinists in 1560.

Exactly why I am KJV only.

Actually, it's because you trust those Anglicans to have been 100% right.


98%! That's funny. You could measure the leaven in MVs using double digit fractions.

Without leaven, you have dough instead of bread.


(Of course things that are way different are the same as things that are so similar that you would have to measure the differences in Parts Per Million.) Happy eating whiskers!

Yep! Like Jehoiachin being eight at the start of his reign in one account, & being eighteen in another one, in the KJV. Similar as east & west.

 

Lacy Evans:I think you know what would happen if we compared trash heaps. I've seen the fruit of ONE BOOK. (You have too when you were courageous enough to look.) It is not even close.

Having a 400-year head start doesn't exactly hurt.


I could give you a 99 meter head start in a 100 meter race and still obliderate you in a race if the KJVs fruit were my running and the MVs' fruit were yours. You talk about "trash". Document the trash.

Again, if you gave me a 99 meter, 999 MM head start, it couldn't overcome a 400-yr head start time.

However, 400-yr old fruits might be just a bit gamey by now.