Why the Spread of "onlyism" since 1970 in IFB Circles?

Do you know what it is called when one falsely accuses the brethren? Especially after being corrected time and again?

Nor are you. God did not see fit to make it absolutely clear from the 20,000+ pieces of evidence for the originals... and if you have a voice telling you something contrary or in addition to what the Bible says about itself then you should have enough spiritual discernment not to listen to that voice.

Your choice of the KJV is completely arbitrary. Not one of your lengthy, wordy arguments is based on a 'true' premise. Your basic premise is that if something is different from the KJV, it is incorrect. But that premise is demonstrably faulty. It is an assumed conclusion, not a fact. In truth, it contradicts that facts plainly by nothing more complicated than its not being the original.

Yes, we are. The KJV translators do not qualify as Apostles, Prophets, nor holy men of old. They held false doctrines and they entered alternate readings into the margins demonstrating that God did not directly give them a "sure word of prophecy."

This is as truthful as most of your other information.

Discerning Christians can look at the same facts and draw different conclusions. Discerning Christians will not hold their opinions infallible and thus refuse to change in spite of overwhelming evidence. Discerning Christians will not continue to use false premises and faulty/deceptive logic after being shown their error.

If you or any other KJVO presents a solid, consistent, fair, factual case for your beliefs then I will be glad to give them hard consideration. The fact is Will that you all cannot make any case without employing double standards. That in and of itself should make an intelligent person like yourself to pause and take a step back.

No. We have real Bibles based on real scholarship... same as the KJV.

Your saying something doesn't make it true, Will. What makes it true is when you use facts in an honest way to demonstrate your contention or at least show that the facts do not directly refute your contention.

 

Most of these men were demonstrably NOT KJVO. Spurgeon endorsed and preached from the RV. Wesley created his own translation. Bunyan used the Geneva.

This is false. This guy either doesn't know the particulars of how the fundamentalist movement started or he is propigating a lie. "The Fundamentals" cites scripture from the ASV, RV, and KJV.

I am sure that if you are predisposed to believe the KJVO deceit this is very appealing. However this is nothing but subjectivism appealing to emotion.

Again, one can only wonder if this guy is ignorant or dishonest. The source of new versions is lower criticism that shows genuine respect for the Word of God to every extent that Erasmus or the KJV translators did.

I have also never met a modernist that liked the NASB or NKJV.

I have never heard of any Mormon that preferred the NASB. They all seem to prefer the KJV. That should tell us something! (and yes I am being facetious in order to demonstrate the bankruptcy of this guys argument)

Guilt by association cuts both ways. Besides, how comprehensively truthful would you say this guys anecdotal experience with modernist is to making a blanket statement about all modernists? I would imagine there are modernists that prefer the KJV if for no other reason than it reads like Shakespeare.

Nope. They just agree with the orthodox view of scripture held by all the men he cited above with such high regard as well as the writers of the great confessions he cited. All pointed authority back to the originals.

Unfortunately, that is exactly what KJVOnlyism does.

That has been demonstrated untrue. At the same time, a large block of KJVO pseudo-fundamentalists have veered off into easy believism and radical legalism.

That is true. KJVOnlyism abandons the final authority of what scripture says about itself and superimposes man-made ideas over top of it.

Coming from a man who would make himself the authority over those who read his diatribe this rings completely hollow... especially since he has not once cited scripture or evidence to demonstrate that KJVOnlyism is fundamental or true.

[ March 12, 2004, 05:44 PM: Message edited by: Scott J ]

 

Will Kinney:Hi brother Jim, Yes, brother Marty Shue wrote an excellent point by point refuatation of Hudson's efforts to rob us of any inspired, inerrant Bible.

Actually, this article is mostly guesswork and opinion. Did Marty bother to do the footwork to find material to prove Hudson wrong, as Hudson did with several of the more prominent KJVO authors? It doesn't appear he did. And Marty's last post that I've seen in this forum(under the nick "Doulon") was calling us a bunch of reprobates. He's yet another example of someone being so eaten up with a false doctrine that his rationality has gone out the window. And that's fast happening to YOU, Will! How do I know this? Because you've gone from one who tried to defend the KJVO myth in an intelligent manner to one who does these endless versions comparisons and arbitrarily says any other rendering but the KJV's is wrong, without one peep of proof-and also endlessly repeating that we non KJVOs have no valid Bibles, which is a completely false statement.I pray you open your eyes before it's too late.


Hudson doesn't have one, nor does "Doktor Bob", nor Larry, nor Archy, nor a whole bunch of people at this board.

Thanx for again confirming what I wrote above. Heck, you can't even tell us BY WHOSE AUTHORITY you make such statements-and you've been given ample opportunity to do so! In fact, you STILL have every opportunity! But I won't hold my breath waiting for you to actually USE it.

None of them, especially Gary Hudson, knows for sure Where nor What God's words are but they are sure it is not in the King James Bible. That is the only thing our resident scholars agree on.

WRONG. We agree that the KJV is NOT the only valid English Bible version out there. This is a fave mantra of the KJVOs-that we hate the KJV or don't consider it valid. This is an outright Onlyist LIE!

Each of these men has a mystical bible that exists only in their own minds

ANOTHER BLATANT ONLYIST LIE! As a Christian, Will, how in good conscience repeat such filth?


and their individual "bibles" differ in many points from the other guys version.

That's the way it's been in English Bibles from the gitgo, Will. The Coverdale differs from the Tyndale, the Geneva from the Coverdale, the AV from the Geneva, etc. And other versions contemporary with those I named differed from them and from each other. You simply cannot accep the fact that God preserved/provided His word AS HE CHOSE, rather than by following the silly notions of men, can you?

 

I was wrong. It was not Brother Will, but Marty Shue who posted a reply to Mr. Hudson's article in another forum. I include here the link where I read the article and will post the article itself later tonight.

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/whichversion/message/16357 </font>[/QUOTE]I might have missed something, but I never saw any facts in his rebuttal. Can anyone point them, out if there are any?

 

Dr Bob, and Squire, you all did an excellant job of desribing what I already knew. Thank You.

I believe that another reason "onlyism" is spreading like fire in IFB (or as I call them NeoIFB) circles is because Satan knows his time is limited.
Christ will return.
setting the stage for Satan's right hand man.
At that point the world will be united under ONLY one man, using ONLY one currency, worshipping ONLY the antichrist. In a false church that he will declare to be ONLY right. Using ONLY one Bible.
If satan can get us worshipping ONLY one Bible, instead of the ONE AND ONLY CHRIST. He thinks he is being successful.

"ONLYISM" is just paving the way for apostacy.

but you see God is always ahead of Satan.

There are many true and devout Christians that are being duped into ushering in Satan's plan.

Search for the Truth, instead of believing half-truths, and illogic .

 

Reading the posts in this thread, it's more then obvious that the blind want to be blind and go into the ditch with their leaders, scholars and fasle gods.


Such a shame. Such wasted potential and ability being tossed aside for a love of blindness and confusion and lies. I've never seen liars, no not even the Clinton's, who can hold a candle to the lie machine(s) of the mv cult.


Most of their garbage isn't even worth the time it takes to blink an eye.


Jim

 

Reading the posts of Jim W, it's more than obvious that he chooses to remain blinded by his unscriptural myth, as he choses the Anglican scholars over Baptist scholars, even Fundamental ones. His false gods, or at least he's exalted the Anglican translaters to Prophets. "Holy men of old" to him means 1611.
Such a shame. Such wasted ability b/c of loving a position with 0% Scriptural support built on conjecture, building from the roof, down, etc. I've rarely seen people like J__ W___, who arrogantly accuse MV lovers as being worse than the Clinton's, while Bro Ward worships his PICKLE (No, I'm not calling the KJV:kjb a pickle, only saying that Bro JW believes that God has pickled His Word in English in the KJV:kjb.)
Most of his garbage isn't even worth the time it takes to blink an eye

 

Void of original thoughts are ya?

Not surptising since most mv lovers rely on others to do their thinking for them.

 

(I call it mocking and showing how silly ya are)
Void of original thought are ya?
Not surprising since many KJVO's:kjbo's rely on others such as Ruckman, Waite, Riplinger, etc to do their thinking for them.

 

Just the fact. Just the facts. You have been challenfged by those you call liars and have not answered their challenges. Do you believe eveything you are told and not willing to accept a challenge? You have the ame sort of appeal so many others I have read that are KJVO. Shout, stomp and spit doesn't replace facts. Some people are more intelligent than that. What facts do you have to give us other than emotional ignorance? If you read your Bible Jesuz never debated in your style. You made some of the typical emotional statements but zero facts to substantiate your claims.

Like they say "If you think education is expensive try ignorance."

Would you call Billy Graham a liar when he wrote on page 251 of Just As I Am: The Autobiography of Billy Graham, Billy Graham writes, "During this holy but hard time, letters to Ruth were my safety valve. In the intimacy of our partnership in the ministry, as well as our mutual love and respect, I could express myself to her as to few others. I smarted under grievous criticisms from fundamentalists, and I minced no words in telling her how I felt: '"Some of the things they say are pure fabrications.... I do not intend to get down to their mud slinging and get into endless arguments and discussions with them.... We are too busy winning souls to Christ and helping build the church to go down and argue with these... publicity-seekers.'" "I continued in the same vain: '"If a man accepts the deity of Christ and is living for Christ to the best of his knowledge, I intend to have fellowship with him in Christ. If this extreme type of fundamentalism was of God, it would have brought revival long ago. Instead it has brought dissension, strife, and has produced dead and lifeless churches."


Where I live the KJVO churches are like a wax museum. They are dead and lifeless. None of them are winning people to Christ. In fact they are clearly dying while the area is growing.

Why don't you come to California and show them how its done?

 

As I see all of the discussion on this thread all of the replies are from people who read and use the KJV, so do I. Nobody here hates the KJV, they just say there are other valid versions.Why does that make the KJVO people so crazy.I think everybody here uses Hebrew and Greek helps,Bible handbooks,commentaries,and ect.,so why would comparing several Bible versions be so truamatic.
I am KJV uses and reads mostly, I guess that makes me KJV preferred.

 

Exactly.

Where is all this KJVO nonsense coming from?
what is wrong with using other versions?
Seems Satan wants to keep people blinded to the truth.

I love the KJV, I'm also KJVpreferred.
I also believe it is a word of God to the English speaking people.
I just believe that the NIV, and NASB, among others, are to.

 

gb9,
As an IFB, Your indictment quoting B. Graham has more truth in it that I'd like to admit. But I must, while we're proclaiming separation, we are separating ourselves from compassion and reason. No, I also have a problem with some of B. Graham's associations (RC's, etc), but he might be reaching more for Christ than 50% of all IFB's. I may be way off, one way or another, but let's reach lost souls for Christ!

 

I'm not sure what this has to go with the subject at hand but I believe that Graham is very wrong here. It is this type of thinking and practice that has pushed evangelicalism into the current ECT mess and has promoted a general lack of understanding of what a evangelical is at all.

Graham was not smarting from extreme fundamentalism; he was smarting from his departure from Biblical precept.

Andy