Anyone get out of KJV?

I was rescued from the sect after studying the issue on and off for about 20 years.My Church suffered a split when I was a teenager in the 70's that made me first aware of the movement, and I got sucked in from reading the writings of KJVO proponents who compared carefully chosen Scripture, preservation of MSS, etc...and to make a long story short, I came to realize that the KJVO claims were simply inconsistent, most KJVO "scholars" were just plain mean "by their fruits you will know them"...and the glorification "not being a scholar", what I mean by this is that if you came to the position that you accept other versions, as well as the KJV, that "you're too smart for your own good", or that "you think you can out smart God" ( I heard Mickey Carter say this personally). The attitude of "oneupmanship" just became too much. (as someone on another thread claimed you cannot be mature except by reading the KJV! get a grip ) The surpressing of known facts too bothered me as they claim to be Truth seekers...I was not taught how King James felt about Baptist, his marrying off his children to Catholics, his fondness for his courtiers, his torturing to death of Puritans, etc shall I continue? the inclusion of the Apocrypha in the 1611, yes, it DID have a copyright, it's biased Church of England translators, the lack of information about Erasmus, the Roman Catholic humanist, the Catholic readings from the Latin Vulgate in the 1611, that the 1611 was not taken from one edition of the TR, but many (didn't MC say about modern English versions, "Things That Are Different Are Not The Same?")--hey, the KJVO position is just plain inconsistent! sorry!

 

I came out of that type of church, thankfully the church has changed and so have I. It just never made much sense to me. I have a brother-in-law who was told he wasn't saved because the bible used was NASB. Now after almost 20 years in ministry I sure hope he gets that taken care of!

 

As a fairly new Christian, my dad & I almost had a physical confrontation with some KJVOs who didn't like his reading aloud from the NASB in a public park. We then resolved to study the issue.

Although we found charlatans & liars on both sides of the issue, we found that(1)the KJVOs have no valid evidence supporting their doctrine, and(2)they tend to play "follow the leader", taking as their "leader" the collective ideas put forth by the most prominent of the KJVO authors such as Fuller, Riplinger, and Ruckman, and(3) they operate by a great double standard, I.E., that it's OK for the KJV to have added words here & there, such as "the image of" in Romans 11:4, but NOT OK if another version has done likewise at another verse.

My anti-Onlyism beliefs weren't just formed out of thin air, or from any dislike of the KJV; they were formed after several years of careful study of both sides of the issue.

 

Then this world is totally confused...because ALL "translastions" and I use that term loosley, have added and over 90% have taken away, And Revelation 22 covers that clearly. So judging from what I've read from the throughly educated people here is that NNE has the TRUE word of god. All we have now is confusion and God is not the author of confusion..so who does that leave?? Someone here stated that they were glad the church changed...God has never changed and neither should the church, thats the problem with churches today, so why is there a "new" book with the title "bible" coming out every other year? If KJV wasn't it, why didn't it die out long ago?

I will agree that the bible used does not have to have KJV on it to lead someone to Christ, if a person believes that, they are a little on the extreme side of KJV "only"

 

No twice. I am not KJVo, and although my parents gave me a KJV on 5th birthday I was not brought up KJVo.

In my early teens there was some sort of KJVo related disagreement at Church we were at. I wasn't taking too much notice of goings on at the time though so can't give further details.

I will say that if I ever have kids they will not be getting a KJV on their 5th birthdays...They'll get it and another translation when they are born

 

I was raised on the KJV by parents who only used the KJV. For awhile, I was KJVO with all the same mindless arguments.

I got tired of the mistranslations, bad translations, archaic language, anglican influence, etc. I now exclusively use the NKJV, NASB, and ESV.

The Lord drove me from the KJV altogether.

 

You are right. We do not have the original manuscripts. It is an educated scientific guess.

If oyu ever look at some of the manuscripts you wil notice that over time what once was commentary written in the margin was brought into the text later. So now it is the job of the textual critic to reverse that process and try to bring the text back to where it was originally.

God's word must never change but the methods by which we reach people should always be changing. Many of the locations today have locked gates. So personal discipleship is even more important than ever.

Even recently I have noticed that the secualr society is addressing some of the things the creationists are coming forward with. They are reading that material so they can support their own position.

Whether you like it or not the church does change. Everybody brings their baggage in the door. They bring what they have good and bad. Ever seen a person buy an cheaper car as they get older. Ever seen a person who is content with what they once were. Greed is a constant battle. We have bigger and better homes that are more comfortable. We have churches with air conditioning that once had nothing. We have faster computers each year.

Spurgeon said that we are to have a Bible in one hand and the newspaper in the other. We must study scripture well and undertsand those we are trying to reach.

 

it wasn't easy to escape KJBO for me, having trusted J.T. Chick's earlier comics as a child--This Was Your Life, etc.--n being led on by his sensational Alberto Riviera series. then came Sabotaged, which accused all bibles (even the KJB itself to an extent) of being corrupted by Jesuit infiltration.

besides Chick, i'd also be fed literature comparing MVs to the KJB, as though the latter were a fair standard n some "divine original." so the GNB became Bad News for Modern Man, the NIV also got villified, but none more so than the RSV.

so how did my escape fr KJBOism come abt? i'm thankful for the opportunity to look at some of the MSS evidence underlying both the KJB n the other translations n see how every translator has to make hard decisions on each textual variant. also, the opportunity to study how translation works (having completed the textual decision) really helped--the idea that it involves the communication of MEANING rather than WORD-FORMS (such as athnachs, energic nuns, moveable nus, dual endings, Mizraim, etc.).

anyway, it's wonderful to have an assurance of God's preservation thru various MSS n text-types, dynamic AND literal translations, Indo-European languages n other languages, etc. what a gt God we serve!

here's a link to the KJB-Only Anonymous Page, fyip: http://www.post1.com/home/amarillo/escape.htm

 

I escaped KJVO about 2 years ago, although I was not brought up in it. I actually bought into it hook-line-and-sinker back in 1991. I was using the NASB and the NIV at the time when I met a brother who was KJVO. After having fellowship with him for a few months, I became interested in why he held the position that he did. He gave me all of the "standards" to read: David Otis Fuller, Jasper James Ray, Samuel Gipp, and plenty of Peter Ruckman. In fact, at one time I owned (and actually had read) every book that Ruckman wrote. Their writings convinced me that I was using the "wrong bibles" and needed to use the KJV. Since this brother lived about an hour away, I didin't have regular fellowship with him, so the KJVO position that I adopted was pretty much a personal belief, since the church I was going to didn't hold it. It wasn't until 1995 that I started going to a KJVO church, where my beliefs in it were solidified. I was a staunch KJVO, preaching every chance I got about the virtues of the KJV and the "satanic influence of the MV's" (after all, all of the problems in Christianity, all of the apostasy around us, stemmed from the lack of using the KJV! )

It wasn't until 2001 when I started to question my position. I finally realized that my strongest times with the Lord - resulting in most fruitful spiritual growth had occured prior to me using the KJV. The 10 years that I was KJVO, in retrospect, were the most spiritually driest years of my Christian life! I really longed for the fellowship and presence of the Lord, like I used to have - when I used MV's. It finally dawned on me that the KJV had become my purpose, my cause, my all-in-all - thus replacing Christ in my life. It became apparent to me that I had surrounded myself with fellow KJVO believers, who held the KJV in ther hands, raising them high in the air proclaiming that the KJV was the word of God, but yet didn't really know the God that was revealed within its pages. Don't get me wrong, I am not doubting their salvation - after all, I was one of them and I knew that I was saved, but yet they lacked a serious relationship with Christ in their lives - and mine too.

It wasn't until coming to the Baptist Board, and seeing the evidence against the KJVO movement, that I started to study for myself. I couldn't believe how gullable I had become - ignoring the hard-cold facts that were before me all along. It was such a pleasure to be able to pick up my old (and dusty!) copy of my NASB from 1986 and start to read it again. What joy that brought to my soul - to read God's words again in modern day english, without trying to figure out what was actually being stated (I could never admit that before, since admitting that you didn't understand old english was a sign of weakness in the KJVO movement). It also dawned on me that all of the explaining and the verbal re-wording of the verses that I had been doing for the past 10 years, was actually the way that the MV's had worded it.

I have to admit that I still struggle at times, since great pain was taken in hammering in the fact that the exact wording (i.e. the very choice of the words) of the KJV was inspired. When I read a verse in the ESV or NASB or for that matter the NKJV, which doesn't exactly use the same wording as the KJV, I have to constantly fight against the old brainwashing that "this is wrong" - for instance in Rom. 3:25, does it make sense to use the word "propitiation" or to explain what it means in the verse? After all, you will need to explain it anyways since its not a word that is used in today's language.

Praise the Lord for the freedom that He has provided! I still consider myself a recovering Pharisee, which is something that I will need to keep in check for the rest of my life, but I am free again - by His grace!

 

Looking through this string has confirmed what I believe...this world is one big mass confusion..(Thank you Satan) It's obvious you all are referring to the militant side of this subject.
Which I agree you can go to far with this in one direction (KJV ONLY) to the other direction (where most people seem to end up)
Reply in my direction if you like, I won't be spending any more time here.
I should have followed my instinct and not go here.
Farewell...

 

Thanks for the candid sharing, Mesly! the honesty's refreshing, indeed, n what a gt encouragement to all of us who've spent countless hours on this board n others as a ministry to those looking to out KJBOism.

Soli Deo Gloria!

 

Mark this down as the "first undisputed" post that clearly attacks the KJV as a translation.

KJVO's, you might want to save this one. At some point in the future you will make the claim that people dislike and attack the KJV here on the Baptist Board. The response will be that it's not the KJV that is attacked but the KJVO philosophy. You will be asked to provide proof otherwise. This post will provide that proof.

Daniel David, no offense intended. Nothing personal I assure you.

 

Pastor Bob, all of the above is true. Each of those factors drove me from the KJV. Of course, since the kingdom of our Lord is one of truth, I had to reject KJVO. The more I studied various words and phrases that are translated in the KJV, I had to reject that too.

The KJV was fine for then. Now, it betrays the purpose of Scripture (that the common man may know God).

KJVO are very catholic in there approach. The Catholics taught that only those who knew Latin could know God.

Now, only those who understand elizabethan english may know God.

One person even said that you can be saved with a newer version but can't really grow. How ignorant is that.

I want an accurate translation of what God said. Therefore, I must reject the KJV.

 

The factors you mentioned were:
1. "mistranslations, bad translations"
Where does the KJV mistranslate from the Greek text(s) that were used by the translators?

2. "archaic language"
Of course you realize that I cannot accept this as a viable reason. The "archaic" words are so minimal and takes but one simple explanation to understand that they are a non-factor. I could easily list many words in the versions you listed that would require explanations as well.

3. "anglican influence"
As has been pointed out by many MV proponents, it is the scholarship of the translator(s) that are the key, not that the doctrinal leanings are unimportant, but they do not detract from translating a Greek word into English.

If the KJV was Scripture then, and I've found few that would deny that it was, then it is still Scripture today and is still performing it's intended purpose. Our little church has seen many people come to know God through the Scriptures this year. Praise the Lord!

I'd say that was more of a Calvinistic viewpoint. God only chose those who could speak English to be saved. I believe that salvation is free to all men who will recieve Him. Faith comes by hearing, and hearing by the Word of God.

What a gross misrepresentation of the KJV to say that one must understand "Elizabethan English" to understand it. My children have never been taught such English, yet they understand their KJV Bibles.

You must also reject the testimony of Christians for the past 400 years. You must also reject texual scholars who confirm that the KJV is an accurate translation of the extant manuscript evidence.

Can you not see that you are doing what you accuse the KJVO crowd of doing. You are telling them that their Bible is inferior and that your's is superior. You are saying that their Bible does not fulfill the requirement to be classified as Scripture and in fact, "betrays" that very purpose. How is that any different?

 

1. Just a few examples as this could take awhile:

a. Any use of God forbid in the New Testament. This is not a translation of the greek words for "God" and "forbid". The two words used literally mean: Certainly not or May it never be. ERROR No. 1.

b. 1 Timothy 6:20 - the KJV uses the word "science". Nevermind that the word is "Gnosis", meaning "knowledge". ERROR No. 2.

c. Romans 7:5 - the KJV uses the word "motions". Nevermind that the word is " ", meaning "an enduring, undergoing, suffering". The funniest part about this one is that the KJV translators included a footnote (which supposedly causes doubt) stating that it was "passions". Why not just put the correct word? ERROR No. 3.

d. Romans 8:16 - The KJV uses the word "itself" in reference to the Holy Spirit. Now, I prefer to not regard the Holy Spirit as Neuter as the cults do, but the KJV translators must have had an essoteric experience on this one. Nice work. ERROR No. 4.

e. Luke 1:35 - The KJV uses the word "thing" in reference to the Christ child. Now, from what I know, Christ was MALE, not a thing. They also apparently embraced the Planned Parenthood mantra about the unborn CHILD only being a "thing". Again, why are they so intend on denying the complete humanity of Christ? ERROR No. 5.

Now look, I could continue, but when I saw each of these ERRORS that CANNOT BE EXPLAINED AWAY, I walked away from the KJV. Remember, I was KJVO. It took the truth to set me free.

This wasn't as big a factor Bob, but it nonetheless added to the list. Remember, I was KJVO.

Try Acts 1:20. They did incorporate their influence. Remember, the KJV was not needed. The King wanted the influence OVER the church. That isn't an Anglican ideal? Come on.

Let me just stop real quick, I don't deny that it is Scripture. It is just outdated though.

No doubt you have sat down and explained the Scriptures to your children, as a faithful father would. In that, I commend you. Not everyone has a father to explain what the words are though.

Again, I do not reject their work. I do reject the notion that the KJV is the best version for today.

In fact, the fundamentalists 80 years ago deemed it INFERIOR to the American Standard Version. Thats right, INFERIOR. I am a fundamentalist.

Not quite, they are telling me I don't have a bible. I do believe the KJV is inferior to others. But I also believe the NLT, NIV, NIrV, TNIV, Message, CEV, Good news, etc. are inferior.

I rate versions this way:

Greek/Hebrew
NASB
ESV
NKJV
MKJV
LITV
KJV