Beginnings of KJV-Only Movement?

I'm not KJVO. I love the KJV and sometimes I prefer it over most versions, but I most often use the NKJV.

However, I get the impression (and this is purely impression, not studied history) that the big change came when Zondervan really pushed hard to get the NIV adopted in churches. I know some people vigorously defend the NIV, but I don't like the translation very much, and I know I can't be alone.

I attribute much (if not most) of its success to a very aggressive marketing campaign by Zondervan. I even remember a very "loud" campaign by crosswalk.com about how they integrated "the world's favorite translation, the NIV" into their web site.

With the NIV in the door, I think pastors/people felt more free to grab competing modern versions which would please the same people to whom the NIV appeals, but were arguably better than the NIV.

The above MAY BE (not necessarily, but my guess) why and when some of the modern translations took over. If I'm right, then Zondervan was the driving force. If I'm wrong, then I think it's safe to say Zondervan played a big part.

 

You are most likely correct...Marketing is everything in the business world,,,and isn't a printed Bible part of marketing?

As a reader, I still enjoy the Phillips New Testament,,,,I know the author and his theology, but the translation is in modern popular English, and I like that. Another copy I like is the Reader's Digest Bible. It is RSV, but does not have verses and chapters,,it is straight reading like a novel......or even the original manuscripts...I can sit and read several 100 pages and actually understand what I have read. Then, I do have many years of theology behind me and it does enter my mind as I read any translation.

Cheers,

Jim

 

Sometimes you are very intelligent...
Now if you weren't a calvinist you would be perfect!!! :laugh:
Just jokin bro. (no one is perfect!!!! )

I think you are right here...
You are not alone, I don't prefer the NIV either... to me it is too stiff...sometimes even technical...
But that is my opinion.

Here lately, I have been gravitating towards the NKJV.
And doing my devotional reading out of the NLT.
And sermon prep, and teaching prep using all others...with the KJV in the forefront...

 

Nah, it's just after 6,000+ dopey posts, the odds are in my favor to post something that sounds intelligent.

 

Quote: "Nah, it's just after 6,000+ dopey posts, the odds are in my favor to post something that sounds intelligent. "

That's better than just being written off because you are old. Lol

Cheers,

Jim

 

Off topic

Heh, heh, once in a while in a post here I'll quote a verse from the Readers Digest Version (labeled as the RDV); nobody's said anything about it yet. :laugh:

Today's New International Version has a new product that offers Bibles without versification.

Individual books in the series are offered on-line.
See The Books of the Bible [LINK]

I downloaded one and am using it along side my ESV as I study through James.
It definitely would not work as a Study Bible!
But like a bible on CD or MP3, it provides a new way to experence the word of God.

Rob

 

I think we can safely conclude that the KJVO doctrine began with MAN.

 

Very interesting! I didn't get saved until the 80s, so that would explain why I wasn't aware of this. I'll take your explanation over mine.

 

A close friend and colleague attended Westminster Seminary while the NIV was being formulated. One of his profs was on the translation committee, and he remembered the man shaking his head and saying (on more than one occasion), "They are using a different word, just to be using a different word."

 

Folks, especially christianbookshelf, pay attention to Squire. He's on target. He knows his recent church history.

I'll add my two yen worth here, since I lived right in the middle of it all and know personally many of the main movers. (Am I name-dropping? Who cares, if I tell the truth!)

If you go by the books on the subject, the KJVO movement could not possibly have started before 1970. The only books on the subject written before then were: Our Authorized Bible Vindicated, by 7th Day Adventist Benjamin Wilkinson (1930), God Wrote Only One Bible, by Jasper J. Ray (1955; unknown then and now in IFB circles except for this one pamphlet), and something by Ruckman in about 1966, I don't remember what. None of these books had any influence at all until 1970

In 1970 two books came out which attracted interest: Which Bible? by David Otis Fuller, and The Christian's Handbook of Manuscript Evidence, by Peter Ruckman. Many Fundamentalists dismissed Ruckman as a radical, though he began to have influence at that time. Fuller's book had a much greater influence. However, this was not enough to start a movement.

There was quite a lot of resistance to the KJVO idea in those days among Fundamentalists. I remember at Tennessee Temple in about 1974 when Dr. Lee Roberson declared that Bible versions must not be discussed on campus because the subject was causing problems. (Mexdeaf will back me up on this.)

When I traveled on deputation to come to Japan from late 1977 to 1981, there was not a hint of a movement. I visited many churches and met many pastors, but the issue did not come up one single time, not in missionary questionnaires, not in doctrinal statements, not in sermons, not in colleges.

My grandfather, John R. Rice, died in 1980. He openly opposed Ruckman and others throughout the 1970's, and the vast majority of IFB's agreed with him. A guy named Herbert F. Evans printed (without John R. Rice's permission) a series of letters between him and Rice about the issue, but I saw no "KJVO movement" at that time, only a few individuals.

On the mission field I began to hear stories and see articles, so I began studying out the issue in preparation for our furlough in 1986. However, once again the issue did not come up one single time, not in missionary questionnaires, not in doctrinal statements, not in sermons, not in colleges. So on the basis of this I'm going to tentatively agree that an actual KJVO movement (with doctrinal statements, colleges, well-known leaders, etc.) did not really get started until the late 1980's. That's only twenty years ago!

My two yen. :type:

 

I agree with you John....

It was in the late 80s to mid 90s, that it started appearing in WV.
My dad was a pastor in the 70s and 80s. It never was an issue...
And we were as IFB as possible then... (actually things and beliefs have changed in IFBdom..I am a true Fundamentalist.. not a neo-fundie)

We even had a revival in which the evangelist used another version (I was 10 yrs old at the time) and nothing was said, and 40 people were saved in our little country church...

It wasn't until the IFBs started a fellowship in and around Clendenin, and a couple pastors, one from Ruckman's school were imported, that things started getting ugly in the IFBs where I grew up...
There is a publisher of KJVO from WV...Timothy Morton...
And he started, putting his stuff out around 94-95 also...



But by this time, I was married and involved in my wife's church (ABC).
And now I am glad, I don't have to put up with this stuff...

Although it has infected some of our ABC churches as well...
Usually the backwoods, small country churches, with un-educated preachers that just preach what they hear from others... They are sincere, but sincerity means nothing, when you are sincerly wrong...

Also, I put part of the blame on the current Sword of the Lord newspaper.. it is not the same as it was when I grew up.. I used to love to read it when I was a boy... It was biblically focused...

Now, except for the sections with the older sermons, it is just opinions of neo-fundies....

Sorry, John, but I feel the current editor has ruined your Grandfather's paper.. and I am not alone. There are more of us that long for the days when John R. Rice was still in charge.

 

Amen, Brother John of Japan -- Preach it! :thumbs:

In 1988 I did a search with the then search engine
and found 200 hits for 'KJV1611'. None of them would
help you find a copy of the KJV1611 Edition, but there were
200 hits. Today there are 45,300 hits.

 

Well, Tim, I certainly miss Granddad and his wisdom, and I think Fundamentalism really needs someone like him right now.

Having said that, I've heard similar sentiments about the good old SOTL, but I've never been able to figure them out. After a long hiatus, I've been taking the SOTL again for the past 1 1/2 years and have yet to see radicalism, in particular on the KJVO issue. So I'm puzzled.

I know some Calvinists oppose the current SOTL, but then they opposed it under Granddad, too, since he actually had the nerve to edit Spurgeon's sermons. (Imagine that, an editor editing!) Never mind that through John R. Rice's promotion of Spurgeon he enjoys a great popularity today, so much so that Pilgrim sent Granddad a complete set of Spurgeon's sermons that they publish.

Some people on the Internet say "the Hyles-Sword crowd" like it was a curse word, but the truth is Smith broke company with Hyles years ago, and you'll find no Hammond ads, sermons, etc. in the SOTL. So I'm puzzled.

 

JoJ : "to edit Spurgeon's sermons" . Isn't that rather euphemistic ?

 

Nope. That's exactly what he did. I know. I was there--I worked at the Sword as a book editor and proof reader. He edited lots of preachers' sermons, not just Spurgeon.

He edited them for length and he edited them for content. Did he edit them for doctrinal content? Of course he did! I can't imagine a Christian magazine editor who would not edit a sermon!

Entry from MS Bookshelf 98 dictionary:

1. ​

​

​

a. To prepare (written material) for publication or presentation, as by correcting, revising, or adapting. b. To prepare an edition of for publication: edit a collection of short stories. c. To modify or adapt so as to make suitable or acceptable: edited her remarks for presentation to a younger audience.​

2. ​

To supervise the publication of (a newspaper or magazine, for example).​

3. ​

To assemble the components of (a film or soundtrack, for example), as by cutting and splicing.

4. To eliminate; delete: edited the best scene out.​

 

I agree. Brother Hyles changed to the KJVO position after Granddad died in 1980. (He knew Granddad's position clearly.) Just look at his writings and sermons before and after 1980. For just one example, in his book Let's Study the Revelation (1966), Brother Hyles actually corrected the KJV. For example, he says on p. 9 about 1:6, "'AND HATH MADE US KINGS' is better translated 'And hath made us a kingdom of priests.'" (I could give other examples.)

 

The problem with your agruement Squire is that your Ma and Pa publishing house doesn't have the distribution network to mount any real challenge to the big publishing houses. Thomas Nelson for example charges more for a NKJV than the identical Bible in the KJV. I attribute this price difference to Nelson needing to re-capture the expense of producing the NKJV.

When I scan the shelves at either my local Bible bookstore or secular bookstore, I see King James Bibles that are published by the big houses. Very rare to see KJB by a no-name house, at least around here.

By the way, a little off-topic but I had a quality complaint about a Bible from one of the big houses. I contacted them and they fixed the problem in what I would consider in the range 200%. I mean they went way above and beyond.

Tom