What is the deal with KJVo's?

Discussion in '2004 Archive' started by Phillip, Apr 16, 2004.

  1. Phillip

    Phillip
    Expand Collapse
    <b>Moderator</b>
    Moderator

    Joined:
    Jun 29, 2001
    Messages:
    6,708
    Likes Received:
    0
    I have done multiple searches for a King James 1611 "text" version. Using everything from "AV 1611", to "King James 1611 text".

    What is it with these KJVo groups. They ALL claim to be AV1611. They WORSHIP the AV1611. They bow down to the AV1611. They claim to put AV1611's all over their sites. They provide links to AV1611's.

    There is only one small problem----not ONE knows what an AV1611 is. They are all KJV1769? Are all KJVo groups really this dense? How do they get away with calling a 1769 version a 1611 version when there is NO comparison between the two?

    Oh well, its late, enough ranting. Its sad you cannot find the text for a real 1611 King James Version because of all the KJVo's that call themselves AV1611's. Sad, sad, sad ......... :rolleyes:
     
  2. Askjo

    Askjo
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Feb 7, 2003
    Messages:
    3,736
    Likes Received:
    0
    In England they would refer you to the AV 1611 if you look for the KJV 1611. Example: Authorised.

    In USA they would refer you to the KJV 1611 if you look for the AV 1611. Example: Authorized.
     
  3. Ed Edwards

    Ed Edwards
    Expand Collapse
    <img src=/Ed.gif>

    Joined:
    Aug 20, 2002
    Messages:
    15,715
    Likes Received:
    0
    Exactly what i found out ten years ago when i
    was first looking for an electronic copy
    of the KJV1611 edition. Then there were just
    80 such sites (back before Google), now
    there are 100s of such sites.

    I note KJVO beats Flat Earth/Hollow Earth
    theories 100 to one :(

    [​IMG]

    Flat Earth Bible :D
     
  4. Dr. Bob

    Dr. Bob
    Expand Collapse
    Administrator
    Administrator

    Joined:
    Jun 30, 2000
    Messages:
    29,402
    Likes Received:
    12
    Many want the "implication" that they are using an authorized version - which implies that others are unauthorized.

    Of course they frequently omit that it was "authorized" by an Anglican King, not God.

    But agree that it is deceptive bait-and-switch marketing for some to say they are AV1611 or KJB1611 when they use the 1762 Cambridge or 1769 Oxford revisions.

    I am thankful that most of the KJVonly group on the BB are careful to NOT use such tactics.
     
  5. Plain Old Bill

    Plain Old Bill
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Dec 30, 2003
    Messages:
    3,657
    Likes Received:
    0
    For the most part htey are very sincere dedicated Christians. Only problem is they are sincerely wrong on the KJV only question. If you use the KJV and other versions they attack you. When you come up with legitimate questions they come back with thier own questions usually ignoring yours.They cannot be convinced of anything with evidence or facts. Nothing seems to faze them. If you go back in all of the version arguements you can find in the bible version forum you will see for yourself how fruitless it is to debate or discuss Bible Versions with them. Imho it is a waste of time. So although I read in here from time to time I no longer discuss or debate.
     
  6. robycop3

    robycop3
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Jul 31, 2000
    Messages:
    7,573
    Likes Received:
    10
    The main reason I continue to discuss the KJVO myth with its followers is for the sake of newer Christians or those new to the versions issue.

    Sometimes, however, a KJVO actually takes the time and effort to dig into the FACTS of KJVO & discovers it's nothing but a man-made myth. There are several such people right here on this board!

    I believe that we Christians have a duty to work against any & all false doctrines someone tries to add into our worship experience and beliefs, and I KNOW KJVO is one such false doctrine. I do hope that when you have something to say about it, Bill, that you jump right into the discussions!
     
  7. Phillip

    Phillip
    Expand Collapse
    <b>Moderator</b>
    Moderator

    Joined:
    Jun 29, 2001
    Messages:
    6,708
    Likes Received:
    0
    Robycop3 you have a very good point. I notice that the moderators get tired of the KJVo discussion, but they have to live it over and over, every single day. In actuality, from an outside perspective there are new people coming on all the time who hold to the KJVo position. People like Michelle, who mean well, but cannot break free from the "faith" strangle-hold of a Bible they grew up with. I think it is important to keep the KJVo debate open so that new people can learn from it. It may be suprising how many people just read the posts to try to learn. Many never post. It is this type of person who is most likely to gain an understanding because they are trying to learn and not be heard so much. [​IMG]
     
  8. GrannyGumbo

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

    Joined:
    Apr 15, 2002
    Messages:
    11,414
    Likes Received:
    0
    People like Michelle, who mean well, but cannot break free from the "faith" strangle-hold of a Bible they grew up with.

    I think da granny is the only one here who can qualify for still using the Bible they grew up with...who can also say she's never so much as touched anything else that calls itself a bible.

    I've never been *curious*, misled, tempted...shucks, I don't even recognize anything else as God's Holy Word. To give up my kjBible & settle for less would be like sinning. All I have is my faith, my Lord, His Word, and that is ALL I need. You too, if you'd just admit it...but nooo~

    If y'all had carefully and accurately read all of sister Michelle's very excellent posts, you would know she is just a 'baby' Christian...but she's sure on the right path. She knows enough to give y'all a good run fer yo'money, heh-heh.

    She's willing to stand strong for Him and His truth, even in the face of threats and persecution. She's standing on the right side & is not an enemy of God.
     
  9. HankD

    HankD
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 14, 2001
    Messages:
    15,147
    Likes Received:
    322
    Neither is anyone else here an enemy of God Granny.

    HankD
     
  10. Phillip

    Phillip
    Expand Collapse
    <b>Moderator</b>
    Moderator

    Joined:
    Jun 29, 2001
    Messages:
    6,708
    Likes Received:
    0
    Now, now, Granny, don't pull me out of context here. I have always said the the KJV IS the Word of God and I do NOT ever back down from that belief. I just don't believe it is the ONLY version of the Word of God that we have in the English language. When I implied growing up with a Bible, I too grew up with the KJV and I too had difficulty accepting a new version, until I studied further and found out that it was "okay" to do such a thing because, then I ALSO had God's Word. [​IMG]
     
  11. GrannyGumbo

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

    Joined:
    Apr 15, 2002
    Messages:
    11,414
    Likes Received:
    0
    Hey Phillip! The thing that I noticed this morning is an almost fascination with sister Michelle on the Board...

    Then the part on your post that sez 'cannot break free from the "faith" strangle-hold of a Bible they grew up with', really caught my eye, because it looked like a mocking. (I know you weren't mocking, just like I wasn't implying that others here are an enemy of God).

    Sometimes it seems as tho' we are being "picked" to death, ya know? I've never tried to persuade anyone to "change" what they trust is God's Word, but I do jump in with my feeble attempt to defend a brother or sister for their stand.

    Sorry if you tho't I was pulling you out of context(whatever that means)-please forgive me.
     
  12. robycop3

    robycop3
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Jul 31, 2000
    Messages:
    7,573
    Likes Received:
    10
    Sorry, girls, but any doctrine trying to limit GOD to just one version is just plain WRONG. If YOU wish to use just one version, fine, but you have absolutely NO proof nor any authority to tell me I'm wrong to use several versions.
     

Share This Page

Loading...