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: