Has KJVO caused any church splits?

Not that I am aware of; however, I would be surprised if it has not caused a split. Churches split for reasons far more trivial than the Bible.

That would depend greatly on the people involved in the situation. I don't believe you can make an honest, objective, generalized statement. That is a very subjective question with many variables. For example, the attitude and spirit of the pastor and the person involved, the attitude and spirit of the church, both are important factors to consider. On both sides of the isle (if you will) people can be divisive and contentious, stirring strife and discord in the church. I've seen modern version proponents and king james proponents be equally nasty and hateful, which does nothing to edify the body of Christ.

If the pastor is king james only and the church is content, then it would be contentious for a member to stir everybody up about the issue, the member would probably be better off to find another church. But if the member is content to be a part of the fellowship, to grow and learn and contribute without making an issue of the bible, then stay. The person should pray and seek the counsel of God in making the decision.

 

Yes, I know of this happening. Actually, a pastor was forced to resign due to his use of a modern version (not sure which one it was)
I am not sure if the membership split or not, though I do know there were factions on both sides.
From what I recall, the one member I knew from that church was on the side of the pastor but did remain for the new pastor.

As for your other question, I was in a church that was KJV only for a while when I Was not.
That issue did not cause me to leave however because it was not something that was made to be a big deal. Also the position of the church was not an extreme position and really would not be considered "truly" KJV only by many because the official position of the church did allow for other translation based on the TR.

Now I do know of other churches that believe that there is a special significance to the KJV above even bibles in other modern languages.
I could not attend a church like that.

 

What do you mean? It is a fundamental of the faith to have the piano on the right side of the building! Only liberals place is on the left!

Seriously, my dad did tell me a story about a division in a church over which side to put the piano on.
Talk about trivial!

 

Yes, I know of churches that have been split by those who advocate a KJV-only view. I have been contacted before by believers whose church has been split by this KJV-only controversy.

 

In most cases, yes. If you have another option, you should use it.

 

It seems to do the most damage when the congregation is not KJVO then the "doctrine" slithers in amongst them and causes trouble through fighting. A split almost always occurs then.

At my last Church the Pastor wanted to use another translation but he didn't think the congregation would take it well.

 

KJV Only

Churches have definitely split over the KJV. As someone who grew up in a French language Baptist church, the KJV only position seems downright racist--only English speakers can truly access God's Word. I remember when a couple of ding dong American missionaries showed up and their first order of business was to try to create a French KJV--even though they spoke French at a fifth grade level! They only lasted a year or so.:laugh:

 

I daresay that KJVO has done far more damage to the cause of missions than it has to individual churches.

 

I lived in a city where there is a KJVO church that seemed to be well known among the non-Christians as those who kicked the Bible and condemned everyone else. In a certain sense they became the laughing stock of the non-Christians in the community and the non-evangelicals among the Christian community.

 

I don't know about a "split" but I know of several KJVO people who left a certain church, when the new Pastor that came in was a NIV guy.

As far as leaving, I consider the KJVO movement a cult. So, I would find another church. If they are just KJV preferred, I would have no problem with that (The "daddy used it, and so that is the version I like" people).

 

Yes, it is important to distinguish the two. I have never been a member cultish KJV church but rather those that strongly prefer the TR and thus the KJV.

Those that say that French people need the KJV are racist though they might take offense at that statement.

I should add that moderate KJV people would simply want a TR based translation into the other languages.
That is simply a minor error and no big deal.

Those that add the KJV to the gospel or make it a matter of fellowship are the ones that have the real problem.

 

Does this statement mean I should report every post calling me "KJVO" as a personal attack due to it being understood as you say that I am now in a "cult"?

First of all I am not "KJVO". I am not a cult member. Just because some one relies totally on the KJV does NOT mean he is a member of a cult.

But the term used to describe people just like myself as a member of a cult is a personal attack, just as you have now attacked everyone YOU or anyone else here gives the "dubious" title of being "KJVO" to.

Something is very wrong here and it's not because of those who say they rely solely upon the KJV.

 

All I've learned in this forum is that I am now a "cult member" by accusation.:tonofbricks:

 

One member said that he personally considers KJVO a cult.

You say that you are not KJVO.

So his opinion has nothing to do with you.

Lets get back on topic please.

 

OK, so you established he has an opinion and is allowed to express it.

I express my opinion about his calling "KJVO" a cult and am admonished.:BangHead:

Why not admonish his opinion?

I am viewed by many here as "KJVO". As long as they are allowed to express I am "KJVO" then his opinion reflects I am also in this "cult", by opinion.

The only "split" I have observed is when a NIV was handed out in our teen ministry, by mistake, and the teen asked for another Bible because he couldn't follow along with the rest of us.

If that qualifies me to fit into anyone's opinion that I'm anything like "KJVO", a "cult member" it's no longer an opinion but an accusation that needs to be proven.

If it remains only to be an opinion then why is this ok for some, but when others express their opinion it is considered a personal attack?

Maybe I should "split"!

On a good note, some church splits are not bad.

Our church split because of those who wanted to "hang" the former pastor for running off with the piano player. We stayed and watched God move. They started another church up the road apiece. We were much less in membership since they left. We outnumber them by twice and just added three new members last night!

We use the KJV, they use the KJV. We both would be considered "KJVO" by opinion. Neither is a cult. One wants to chastise people for sin. The other wanted to restore the person overtaken in a fault. We both want the move of God.

We both don't let divisive antics of those who want to argue versions to disrupt our servive to the Lord with slighthanded accusations expressed in their OPINION.

There are two nature sexposed in the previous words.

Choose which opinion fits the discussion best about church splits and the opinion about "KJVO" being a cult.:type:

 

Perhaps you should. But then what would we do for entertainment?:laugh:

 

Making the use of the KJV a biblical doctrine rather than a preference is what separates KJVO from KJV preferred. Being KJVO makes about as much sense as NASU95O and excluding all who do not use it or prefer it.

 

Harold,

If you LIKE the KJV, and so use it, I have no problem with that. But the KJVO people (who claim that the KJV is the only legitimate version of scripture), and EXCLUDE or DISMISS other Christians who prefer another version, ARE a cult. When you can take a translation, show that even the people who translated it said it would need to be redone when language progressed (such as the KJV translators did), and yet those people listen to modern "so called" gurus, most of which have little to no actual education in the field, AND they believe in, among other things, a "RE-INSPIRED" version of scriptures, with no Biblical mandate...you have a cult.

I like, for example, the ESV. I happen to read a little Greek. I happen to see that the ESV is more consistent in it's theology, it is truer to the underlying Greek text, and it lacks many of the quantitative and qualitative contradictions that SO many atheist apologists love to throw around.

If you say "Your not reading the real Bible, because your not reading MY translation"...you are part of a cult. Sorry.