I have been on the Baptist Board for several months now. When I first became a member, my motivation was to join in the discussion regarding the KJV -vs- Modern Versions. I rarely posted in other forums. I was a self-proclaimed King James Onlyist. As a result of studying the issue and posting and reading the posts of others then studying to respond, the Bible Versions section of my library has grown by eight books since July of 2002. As I have stated in previous posts, the term KJVO is a broad expression that, IMO, inaccurately encompasses a whole host of ideas, philosophies, and beliefs. What I considered myself to be did not fit into the category labeled as KJVO here on the BB. There were tenets of KJV Onlyism that I did not agree with. Although I do not subscribe to what I would have considered as “radical” KJV Onlyism, I was, nonetheless, lumped in with the group as a whole. In this thread, I would like to define what I have observed here on the BB as KJVO. Then I would like to explain why I, based on this definition, will no longer claim the title of KJVO. The King James Only position to me holds to the following beliefs: 1. The KJV as a translation is inspired. 2. The KJV is the exclusive Word of God in this age. 3. The KJV as an English translation is superior to the Greek readings of any Greek text. 4. The KJV was re-inspired in 1611 and supercedes even the originals. 5. The KJV must be the basis for translations into other languages. I cannot subscribe to the above-mentioned beliefs. I realize that some KJVOs would agree with all five tenets; some would agree with less. Having studied the issue, I cannot agree with any of them in their entirety. To their credit, those who hold such views are fiercely loyal to the Word of God. They will never be accused of questioning the inerrancy or infallibility of the Bible. Those who advance the KJVO philosphy are to be commended for their love of the Word of God. Their separatist instincts have, IMO, correctly sensed that the Modern Versions are connected with apostasy. But they have gone too far down the right road. They have rightly concluded that the KJV is the best, most accurate English translation, but they have gone farther than the historical or scriptural evidence allows. As I mentioned above, I will no longer accept the label KJVO, but rather I will take the Preserved Text or Received Text position. I define this view has holding to the belief that God has providentially preserved His Word through the traditional Received Text. This is the text that has been used by virtually all orthodox, Bible-believing churches from the second century to the present. 99% of all extant New Testament Greek manuscripts support the Received Text, which is the basis for the KJV. It is ironic and unfortunate that most would still say that I am KJVO and simply ignore the Preserved Text position that I offered. They will continue to lump me in with those with whom I disagree and “attack” my position as being KJVO. I understand this because, having studied the two, the KJVO position is much easier to attack. Some would create a red herring by combining the two positions. They then construct a straw man, assuming the Preserved Text position to be a part of the KJVO position and attempt to demolish it from their false premise. I’ve observed that it is invariably an attack on the KJVO position. This thread is in no way intended to offend my KJVO Brothers or to concede to my MV Preferred Brothers. I am simply stating, for the record, what my research on this issue has led me to conclude. I realze that this may draw a response from both sides of the debate. I will try to answer each question to the best of my ability as long as it is offered in the right spirit.