KJVO?

Discussion in '2004 Archive' started by Precepts, Jan 18, 2004.

  1. Precepts

    Precepts
    Expand Collapse
    Banned

    Joined:
    Dec 27, 2003
    Messages:
    1,890
    Likes Received:
    0
    I know people profess and accuse of the KJVO stand, but how isd it possible to be KJVO when the King James Bible is a translation from previous texts.

    Now I agree that the KJB is the complete Word, inerrant, infallable, inspired Word of God, but how does that explain the exitence of KJVO when to say that only the KJB is the Word when the Word existed in "Byzantine" MSS?

    I see the whole aspect of KJVO as ridiculous in trying to establish the KJB as the only copy of God's Word when we all know the KJB came from MSS/ pervious writings in the Ancient Hebrew, Aramaic, and Koine Greek.

    Am I the "only" one who sees this?

    This whole debate seems more concocted than a reality.

    Yall hash it out while I sit back and laugh!
     
  2. ScottEmerson

    ScottEmerson
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Jun 3, 2002
    Messages:
    3,417
    Likes Received:
    0
    KJVOnlyists tend to believe that the only valid English translation of the ancient texts is found in the KJV. They believe that the texts used by the translators was exactly like the originals, and they believe that the translators were somehow inspired to translate perfectly into English what was originally in ancient languages. Again, as I said in another post, just merely look through the various posts to see evidences of KJVO's. They are all over the place.
     
  3. BrianT

    BrianT
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Mar 20, 2002
    Messages:
    3,516
    Likes Received:
    0
    The problem is that the KJV does not match any of those manuscripts 100%. If the KJV is the "complete Word, inerrant, infallable, inspired Word of God" (as you said you believe), what do you do with the differences? Are those differences "errors" in those manuscripts, or can more than one thing be "the word of God" despite textual differences?
     
  4. Chick Daniels

    Chick Daniels
    Expand Collapse
    Member

    Joined:
    Oct 24, 2000
    Messages:
    461
    Likes Received:
    0
    If you study the short history of the KJV Only movement, you will find that it has yet to solidify into a uniformly defined set of assertions. In other words, there is great variety within the movement as to how they explain the "perfection" of the English translation known as the KJV. The recently published book Thou Shalt Keep Them was complied by more than one KJV Only author, and has conflicting opinions within the book as to the issue of perfect preservation and the KJV.

    Chick
     
  5. Charles Meadows

    Charles Meadows
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Dec 4, 2003
    Messages:
    2,276
    Likes Received:
    0
    It seems there are some who assert that the KJV is the ONLY inspired "Word" - being superior to its progenitor manuscripts even. The majority of "KVJOs" I know or have talked with claim that the manuscripts underlying the KJV are "inspired" as well.

    It also seems that many of these Christians disapprove of the labels "KJVO" or "onlyist"!

    As I see it every Christian believes that God has preserved His word. Some feel (like me) that preserving the "essence" of His word does not necessitate preserving a "word for word original" - obviously many do not agree! So to me the name "KJVO" to me does not seem to be pejorative!
     
  6. robycop3

    robycop3
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Jul 31, 2000
    Messages:
    7,573
    Likes Received:
    10
    By your own statement above, QS, why doesn't your group permit any teaching/preaching from another version, since you acknowledge that there are plenty of other valid English versions available?
     
  7. Anti-Alexandrian

    Anti-Alexandrian
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Sep 4, 2002
    Messages:
    764
    Likes Received:
    0
    The acronym "KJBO" was concocted by Bible Agnostics and relativist.But in a nut-shell,"whateverists" think that any "bible"(whichever of the 200+ conflicting authorities)-as long as it's "reliable"- that came from the Vatican's OFFICIAL mss.(Rev 17)and/or came from a monestary's DUMPSTER mss. are the word of God;but on the same token,the Bible believer KNOWS that Bibles from the Graeco/Syrian mss.of the reformation are the word of God,and the KJB is the distillation of those,and the rest are nothing but door-stops.


    So,go ahead,use your silly acronyms,rant and rave,bend the truth,create web-sites,write books,call names,or whatever;truth is I,and others who hold the same conviction will never abandon the word of God(KJB)for nothing...
     
  8. Charles Meadows

    Charles Meadows
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Dec 4, 2003
    Messages:
    2,276
    Likes Received:
    0
    Anti-Alexandrian,

    So you reject the KJBO label? Do you have a preferred name for the "KJBO" stance?

    Obviously not every Christian agrees with your position!
     
  9. GrannyGumbo

    GrannyGumbo
    Expand Collapse
    <img src ="/Granny.gif">

    Joined:
    Apr 15, 2002
    Messages:
    11,414
    Likes Received:
    0
    Do you have a preferred name for the "KJBO" stance?


    "Just Truth" sounds kinda nice! ;)
     
  10. Daniel David

    Daniel David
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 4, 2002
    Messages:
    5,316
    Likes Received:
    0
    KJVO = Truth?

    [​IMG] [​IMG] [​IMG] [​IMG] [​IMG] [​IMG] [​IMG] [​IMG]

    Man, my ribs just recovered from the last time a KJVO tried to say something truthful. There they go again.
     
  11. GrannyGumbo

    GrannyGumbo
    Expand Collapse
    <img src ="/Granny.gif">

    Joined:
    Apr 15, 2002
    Messages:
    11,414
    Likes Received:
    0
    KJVO = Truth?

    "Hey~don't find fault with what you don't understand... But, I am glad to see you laughin','cause you know the Bible sez a merry heart doeth good like a medicine. ;)
     
  12. MissAbbyIFBaptist

    MissAbbyIFBaptist
    Expand Collapse
    <img src=/3374.jpg>

    Joined:
    May 3, 2002
    Messages:
    2,567
    Likes Received:
    0
    Well I'm not sure of others, but I myself have no problem being called a King James Bible only-ist. I'm proud to be one who holds the truth. Course then again I'm one of these people who takes "narrow minded" and "Old fashioned" as compliments, so it's no wonder!

    KJBO= truth. Now that I like! I'm going to remember that one!
    ~Miss Abby
    Proverbs 31:30 KJB [​IMG]
     
  13. rbrent

    rbrent
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 1, 2004
    Messages:
    288
    Likes Received:
    0
    KJVOs include a wide range of beliefs. Often their beliefs are made fun of by folks with only a rudimentary knowledge of Greek and almost no knowledge of Hebrew.

    Those folks with a bit of knowledge use a lexicon or word study book as their source for correcting and criticizing the KJV because they heard their preacher doing that or they heard their professor at Bible school do that.

    As a KJVO, I believe the KJV - any KJV edition (but not the NKJV or the KJII or other of Jay Green's translations) is superior to any edition of the NIV, NASB, ESV, RSV, RV, etc.

    This view, of course, takes into account that printer's errors are not errors in the scripture.

    I believe the KJV is without proven doctrinal error - that the words (not just the message) are precisely what God intended us to have when He preserved His words.

    Even if you prefer to misinterpret Psalm 12:6,7 to be God's promise to preserve the poor and the needy from this generation for ever, it is still common sense to believe that what God originally gave by inspiration, He also preserved in a form that is accessible to us.

    Some folks make fun of KJVOs because we are said to believe that that KJV is superior to the original manuscripts.
    Fundamentally, the KJV is superior to the original manuscripts.

    For that matter, the NIV, NASB, ESV, etc. are also superior to the original manuscripts (but not as superior as the KJV!).

    How can that be? Think about it - we don't HAVE the original manuscripts!

    Something we have - KJV, NIV, whatever, is far superior to something we don't have - its a matter of practicality.

    MVs frequently distort the KJVO position to make a straw man they can tear down so folks will think they've won the argument.

    Frankly, even if we had the original manuscripts, how much good would they do most Christians?

    Most Christians couldn't read the original mss. So even if we had those original autographs - most Christians would still do better reading whatever version they currently read.

    I've spent more than 30 years observing Dr. Ruckman, reading his books, listening to his tapes, sharing friendship and ministry with many of his Bible students.

    I've noticed that, contrary to the accusations of some, Dr. Ruckman himself believes that folks can get saved by reading almost any version of the Bible including the New World Translation of Jehovah's Witnesses.

    As a KJVO, I can fellowship with anyone in the family of God even if they don't use the KJV.
     
  14. tinytim

    tinytim
    Expand Collapse
    <img src =/tim2.jpg>

    Joined:
    Oct 31, 2003
    Messages:
    11,250
    Likes Received:
    0
    Quote: "Some folks make fun of KJVOs because we are said to believe that that KJV is superior to the original manuscripts.
    Fundamentally, the KJV is superior to the original manuscripts.

    For that matter, the NIV, NASB, ESV, etc. are also superior to the original manuscripts (but not as superior as the KJV!)."

    Thus the heresy of KJVO. There is no way a tranlation can be superior to the Inspired words of God. I may accept that they are equal, but not superior.

    If you use the KJV. Praise God. But don't elevate it above what it truly is, A translation of the Bible.
     
  15. LRL71

    LRL71
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Sep 9, 2002
    Messages:
    580
    Likes Received:
    0
    A couple of posters here have stated that:

    KJVO = truth

    If you are KJV-only, have you ever looked at the doctrinal statements of Historic Baptists? Ever heard of the New Hampshire Baptist Confession, London Baptist Confession, or the Philadelphia Confession? How about the Reformed Westminster Confession? Nothing there about KJV-onlyism, nor any remarks about a 'perfect Bible' in English that's 'inspired'. Listen to what you are saying, will you? Historically speaking, Baptists (and other Bible-believing Protestant/Reformed people) have held to an inspired and inerrant original autographa, and the infallible copies of the Bible (historically known as preservation, not 'perfect preservation' as KJV0's have twisted it to mean). Your church and your pastor should be in agreement with this important doctrine(s) of the Bible (hence, Bibliology). If you are KJV-only, then you have a problem with the Bible and how it came down to us today. Baptists should never be so ignorant about their doctrines!

    [snip]

    [ January 19, 2004, 11:22 AM: Message edited by: Pastor_Bob ]
     
  16. Anti-Alexandrian

    Anti-Alexandrian
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Sep 4, 2002
    Messages:
    764
    Likes Received:
    0
    You obviously are ignorant of Church history yourself.Church history bears witness to the rejection of the dark-age Jesuit mss. of Alexandria and "bibles" that came from them.


    And Church history shows that Graeco/Syrian mss. of the reformation and Bibles(KJB,Geneva,Old Latin,Luther,Waldenses,etc..) thereof are the word of God;the A.V. being the outstanding representitive of those mss. and Bibles...
     
  17. GrannyGumbo

    GrannyGumbo
    Expand Collapse
    <img src ="/Granny.gif">

    Joined:
    Apr 15, 2002
    Messages:
    11,414
    Likes Received:
    0
    Well, I reckon GrannyGumb-O is proud, (but not prideful,) to be KJB-O! [​IMG]

    As I've said before-"Like begats Like, & my Bible came from Like". Whatever's in its ancestry is pure. (Those cows up the road is pure-bred & they don't go be mixing no scrubs with'em). :rolleyes:

    "Truth has a way of asserting itself, given time enough." .......Sure has been a l o n g time.!
     
  18. ScottEmerson

    ScottEmerson
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Jun 3, 2002
    Messages:
    3,417
    Likes Received:
    0
    You obviously are ignorant of Church history yourself.Church history bears witness to the rejection of the dark-age Jesuit mss. of Alexandria and "bibles" that came from them. </font>[/QUOTE]Any sources to cite?
     
  19. Precepts

    Precepts
    Expand Collapse
    Banned

    Joined:
    Dec 27, 2003
    Messages:
    1,890
    Likes Received:
    0
    I've been waiting for this.

    The stance that all the "Confessions" as described above prove it.

    It is the still all to well incentives of the Anglican/Protestant. crowd trying to influence the unsuspecting minds of those who really don't understand.

    The Anabaptist, known as the Pilgrims, held to the Geneva Bible, subsequent to the King James, but because of Anglican heirarchy weren't able to bring with them on the Mayflower the KJB. We as IFB are predominately KJB advocates, refusing to let this type of heirarchy lord over us. We know the KJB is the ONLY Bible that is complete and inerrant, infallable and inspired as well. We hold to that, and I don't care how many little organizations and conferences the Protestant movement declares, we will not let "her" rule over our being. That is exactly why we remain independent.

    What looks as if the "sneaking in" of the fallacies of "other versions being translated the same way" is evident to us who know better.

    For those unsuspecting souls, beware, the "mother" is advancing into our realm of purity, we are the Puritans, we are the Anabaptists they all hate so much, that is why they go to such extremes to try and discount our stand. You hardly ever see us on the offensive, attacking them, but you will notice our having to keep a continual defensive position against them.

    The KJB is being attacked, and the subtiliy of the devil is evident in statements like,"I love the KJB, BUT to say it is the only..."

    Goats "BUTT" Wolves "devour" Donkeys "Bray" and sheep just keep going, "Baa-baa"

    So I'll just end my post with a "Baa-baa" [​IMG] [​IMG]
     
  20. Charles Meadows

    Charles Meadows
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Dec 4, 2003
    Messages:
    2,276
    Likes Received:
    0
    That subtle devil - ah YES!!!

    Now I wouldn'y necessarily say that KJVOism id heresy - but it's sure heading in that direction. I'd say more like Pharisaism - inveighing bitterly about English words and missing the big points of Christ's teaching!!

    That subtle devil loves to see the body divided by human silliness! If anybody wants to see this check out the "Balaam's Ass Speaks" journal! This is an exapmle of picking up the Pharisee ball and REALLY RUNNING WITH IT. UGH!!!!!
     

Share This Page

Loading...