Should KJVO be called a cult?

Discussion in 'Bible Versions/Translations' started by robycop3, May 25, 2014.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. robycop3

    robycop3
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Jul 31, 2000
    Messages:
    7,573
    Likes Received:
    10
    The formal definition of a cult is a particular system of religious worship, especially with reference to its rites and ceremonies, or a group or sect bound together by veneration of the same thing, person, ideal, etc.

    This begs the question, "What is a sect?"

    A sect is a body of persons adhering to a particular religious faith; a religious denomination, or any group, party, or faction united by a specific doctrine or under a doctrinal leader.

    However, the common everyday definition of a cult, as we almost-always use that word, is an apostate religious org with a name, a headquarters building, and a specific leader or body of leaders, E. G. the "Watchtower" of the JWs.


    We tend to view a cult or sect in a negative light, assuming all cults or sects are evil. We use the labels on the JW or Mormon denominations, or for Branch Davidians & other small religious groups which are quasi/pseudo-Christian, "having a form of godliness but denying the POWER thereof".


    But, is KJVO a cult? In a word, NO. Not by our common everyday definition of 'cult'. KJVO has no central org, no headquarters, nor any one leader or body of leaders. It's merely a false doctrine believed by some people of almost every Christian religious denomination in the English-speaking world. Different people believe KJVO in differing degrees.


    So, while a group of KJVOs believing the KJVO myth to the same degree might get together to form a little cultlet, there's NO universal KJVO cult.


    Thus, I'm rather skeptical when I see a reference to "the KJVO cult". Few KJVOs believe exactly alike, but they DO share one fact in common...they're all INCORRECT in believing any part of the KJVO myth in any degree whatsoever.
     
    #1 robycop3, May 25, 2014
    Last edited by a moderator: May 25, 2014
  2. questdriven

    questdriven
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 14, 2013
    Messages:
    1,028
    Likes Received:
    33
    I think it's unfair to refer to them as a cult. It's possible some specific places that hold to KJVO act like a cult, but none of the places I've ever been to. And I'm guessing the vast majority do not.

    I was once given a list of "signs your church might be part of a cult". My childhood KJVO church didn't fit any. Essentially, cults try to control the members and have a "thought police" mentality. None of the KJVO churches or groups I've ever known have this.
     
    #2 questdriven, May 25, 2014
    Last edited by a moderator: May 25, 2014
  3. KRJ

    KRJ
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    May 12, 2014
    Messages:
    32
    Likes Received:
    0
    I'm about a 2/3 on the KJV scale. Am I a cultist? ;)

    Hey, if John MacArthur can say he is a leaky dispensationalist then I can be a leaky KJV onlyist. :smilewinkgrin:
     
  4. Winman

    Winman
    Expand Collapse
    Banned

    Joined:
    Jul 8, 2009
    Messages:
    14,768
    Likes Received:
    0
    Ah, come on, I've always wanted to be in a cult.

    Let's just pretend that KJVO is a cult, then I am a cultist. Yeah! :thumbsup:

    [​IMG]

    Being a cultist is fun.
     
  5. RLBosley

    RLBosley
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    May 25, 2012
    Messages:
    1,752
    Likes Received:
    0
    Cultish perhaps. Many are cultlike and many individual KJVO churches are cultish. But the entire movement a cult? No. No centrality or governing body. too fractured to be called a cult, IMO.
     
  6. preachinjesus

    preachinjesus
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member
    Supporter

    Joined:
    Feb 9, 2004
    Messages:
    7,406
    Likes Received:
    99
    Its inappropriate to call them a cult. Misled? Absolutely. But not a cult.
     
  7. Winman

    Winman
    Expand Collapse
    Banned

    Joined:
    Jul 8, 2009
    Messages:
    14,768
    Likes Received:
    0
    You guys are no fun at all. Let KJVO be a cult, give us a break. Everybody else gets to be a cultist, why can't we?

    Look how we dance in church!

    [​IMG]
     
  8. Reformed

    Reformed
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 27, 2012
    Messages:
    1,227
    Likes Received:
    57
    Generally speaking, I would say they are misguided and in error. Some KJVO churches are antagonistic towards those they consider to be in error. Case in point: there is a church on a back road to Annapolis, MD that has sign on their property that reads: "We only use the 1611 Authorized Version". What they are actually communicating to the public is, "We use the KJV, and if you do not, you are not welcome."
     
  9. Winman

    Winman
    Expand Collapse
    Banned

    Joined:
    Jul 8, 2009
    Messages:
    14,768
    Likes Received:
    0
    And what is wrong with that?

    What is wrong with a church agreeing on doctrine?

    Why are folks who use MVs so concerned about folks who choose to use the KJB only?

    Use whatever version you want, but don't go into a church where the people all believe the KJB is the only accurate version and cause problems.

    Go to another church and cause problems.
     
  10. KRJ

    KRJ
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    May 12, 2014
    Messages:
    32
    Likes Received:
    0
    True, but I've seen the snobbery go both ways.

    And the scholars on boards like this should remember that to the laity the definition of textual criticism is often something like, "The battle of the conflicting professors." TR or Westcott Hort? I bet I can find someone to endorse and disparage each one with the letters Th.D. after his name. So which doctor is the best doctor to be doctored by?

    I've never seen Codex Sinaiticus or Vaticanus. And if I saw them I would not know how to examine them. So no matter how many articles I read by scholars who claim to be in the know about them I can never make a truly educated decision.
     
  11. Salty

    Salty
    Expand Collapse
    20,000 Posts Club
    Moderator

    Joined:
    Apr 8, 2003
    Messages:
    22,109
    Likes Received:
    219
    Lets see

    Is it the church members who really believe it - or are they parroting what the pastor says? In addition - is that actually a doctrine or is it just simply a preference? Where does the Bible tell us the KJV is the only (best) version? With a good answer to that, I will become a KJO.

    Depends - If you are KJ-T or P (Traditional or Preferred )- I don't have a problem with that. Its when the KJ O starts telling me that a person can only be saved out of the KJV and other such nonsense.

    If I simply come in with a NJKV or ASVB, NIV, ect; and not say anything - will I be condemned for doing so?

    You assume we want to cause problems - could be we just want an honest answer.


    I do have one additional question for you. As a KJO - do you use the 1611 version or the 1769 version? (excuse me if you have answered that in the past)
     
    #11 Salty, May 25, 2014
    Last edited by a moderator: May 25, 2014
  12. Winman

    Winman
    Expand Collapse
    Banned

    Joined:
    Jul 8, 2009
    Messages:
    14,768
    Likes Received:
    0
    OK

    The church members believe it. Some like myself believe it because they believe God has promised to preserve his word to all generations, and we believe the KJB is that preserved word in English. Others probably believe because that is what they have been taught.

    Well a KJO is a KJP. :laugh:

    I won't use any other version. When I got saved 50 years ago, at first I had several different versions and that caused me to be confused. That is why I studied the subject. I came to believe the KJB is the preserved word of God in English.

    No, lots of folks come to our church with other versions, nobody says a word to them. They can use whatever they want. Now, if they wanted to get up and preach from another version, that might cause some heads to turn.

    Give me a break.

    I use the 1769 version. I am aware of the many changes made since 1611, including textual changes. I do not have a problem with any of these. Most of the changes were spelling as spelling in English was not standardized very well in 1611. Changing the font means nothing. The few textual changes were made to clarify the text. No problem whatsoever.
     
  13. Logos1560

    Logos1560
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Oct 22, 2004
    Messages:
    3,127
    Likes Received:
    2
    present KJV editions are not identical to 1769

    Have you ever actually seen and examined the 1769 Oxford edition of the KJV?

    I know of no present KJV edition that is identical in its text to an actual 1769 Oxford edition of the KJV. There would be as many as 400 differences between the 1769 KJV and any present KJV edition.

    Besides over 100 differences involving LORD/Lord and GOD/God, over 100 differences in spelling, capitalization, use of hyphens, etc., some places were the 1769 Oxford would differ from most present editions include the following Old Testament examples: “Heman” (Gen. 36:22), “thy progenitors” (Gen. 49:26), “Zithri” (Exod. 6:21), “travel’ (Num. 20:14), “brakedst” (Deut. 10:2), “thy tithe“ (Deut. 12:17), “thy earth” (Deut. 12:19), “the widow’s” (Deut. 24:17), “Beer-sheba, Sheba” (Josh. 19:2), “children of Gilead” (Jud. 11:7), “all the coast” (Jud. 19:29), “in a straight“ (1 Sam. 13:6), “Shimei“ (1 Chron. 6:30), “whom God alone” (1 Chron. 29:1), “on the pillars” (2 Chron. 4:12), “thy companions’ (Job 41:6), “unto me“ (Ps. 18:47), “my foot” (Ps. 31:8), “feared” (Ps. 60:4), “in the presence” (Ps. 68:2), “part“ (Ps. 78:66), “When there were” (Ps. 105:12), “gates of iron” (Ps. 107:16), “the latter end” (Prov. 19:20), “riches, honour” (Prov. 22:4), “king of Jerusalem” (Eccl. 1:1), “gone to” (Isa. 15:2), “travel‘ (Lam. 3:5), “a brier” (Micah 7:4), and “mighty is spoiled” (Zech. 11:2). In the New Testament, examples include “And in the same” (Luke 7:21), “ye enter not” (Luke 11:52), “lifted“ (Luke 16:23), “and the truth” (John 14:6), “Now if do” (Rom. 7:20), “not in unbelief” (Rom. 11:23), “the earth” (1 Cor. 4:13), “was done“ (2 Cor. 3:11), “about” (2 Cor. 12:2), “you were inferior” (2 Cor. 12:13), “those who” (Gal. 2:6), “the holy apostles” (Eph. 3:5), “broidered” (1 Tim. 2:9), “sprinkled likewise” (Heb. 9:21), “our joy” (1 John 1:4), and 17 missing words at Revelation 18:22.
     
  14. robycop3

    robycop3
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Jul 31, 2000
    Messages:
    7,573
    Likes Received:
    10
    It shows that church leadership, and most likely, all its members, believes at least one false doctrine, and teaches it.

    Nothing, if it's CORRECT doctrine.

    Because many KJVOs falsely tell others that the KJV is the ONLY valid English Bible version.

    And let them continue in a false doctrine without speaking out? That's sinful. God gave us His truth to tell others, not to keep hidden. Remember Jesus' parable about the rich man's servants, one of whom hid his master's money rather than invest it?

    If the "problem" is condemning the KJVO myth ot any other false doctrine, then I'm all for it.
     
  15. robycop3

    robycop3
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Jul 31, 2000
    Messages:
    7,573
    Likes Received:
    10
    Now, two KJVO congregations that HAVE earned the "cult" label are Faithful Word IFB church in Phoenix AZ, pastored by Steven Anderson and the infamous Westboro Baptist Church of Topeka, KS.

    Anderson prayed for the death of Obama. (Not a word of prayer that Obama might cometa Christ.)

    He sez gays should be executed. (Again, not a word that they should cometa Christ,)

    He is anti-govt. which is in opposition to JESUS' command to obey those in authority, except in idol worship.

    He sez he WORSHIPS THE KJV.

    He is very controlling.

    I believe his "church" is phony as a Chevy Mustang, and is no more representative of IFB than a mosque in Mecca is.

    Nothing needsta be said about Fred Phelps' Westboro Baptist except my last sentence above.

    And both can be examples of one's believing the KJVO myth, which kept the door open for other false doctrines to enter the psyches of those two "pastors".
     
  16. Jordan Kurecki

    Jordan Kurecki
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 26, 2013
    Messages:
    1,452
    Likes Received:
    60
    I would not condemn someone for using a NKJV, ASVB, NIV ,etc, But I would strongly suggest they switch to a KJV.
     
  17. robycop3

    robycop3
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Jul 31, 2000
    Messages:
    7,573
    Likes Received:
    10
    why ? ? ? ? ? ? ?
     
  18. questdriven

    questdriven
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 14, 2013
    Messages:
    1,028
    Likes Received:
    33
    Hehe.:laugh: I like you. You're funny.
     
  19. KRJ

    KRJ
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    May 12, 2014
    Messages:
    32
    Likes Received:
    0
    I reckon that describes me, since my pastor was reading from another translation yesterday and I don't consider him a heretic. I followed along in the KJV, of course, just because I like to read it the way Paul really wrote it you know. :tongue3:

    You can be saved reading a tract, which is not the Word of God. A tract may contain the Word of God but it is not the Word of God. Years ago a well meaning brother gave me an issue of Ruckman's Bible Believer's Bulletin to read. I found it offensive. Still love my King James Bible though. I used a NKJV and NASB for about 10 years. I finally quit them and went back to the Bible of my youth. I'm not leaving it again.
     
    #19 KRJ, May 26, 2014
    Last edited by a moderator: May 26, 2014
  20. Salty

    Salty
    Expand Collapse
    20,000 Posts Club
    Moderator

    Joined:
    Apr 8, 2003
    Messages:
    22,109
    Likes Received:
    219

    I am still waiting on a Scripture reference that the KJV is the preserved Word in English.

    One more questioned - why was the "preserved version" not even translated for well over 1400 years after the cannon was closed?

    Salty

    and I wont even get into which are the "preserved Word of God in other lanuages"
     
    #20 Salty, May 26, 2014
    Last edited by a moderator: May 26, 2014
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page

Loading...