That was certainly an effect but I doubt it was the intent. I suspect that a sense of pious traditionalism not unlike KJVOnlyism prevented later translations from being made.
Latin was considered the language of heaven by the time it was no longer understandable to the masses... I have heard KJVO's argue similar things about the language of the KJV.
BTW, from my experience, there does seem to be a correlation between dictatorial pastors and KJVOnlyism.
Parallel of RC/KJVO
Discussion in '2004 Archive' started by Dr. Bob, Aug 26, 2004.
Page 2 of 4
-
-
A person can be an "onlyist" in their own life without going to the extreme onlyist position of believing the world must be saved from the NIV, and the only thing other versions are worth are bird cage linings.
After coming out of a strong onlyist opinion a couple of years ago, I find myself reverting back to it to a degree. The more I read other versions the more I realize and appreciate the trustworthiness of the KJV.
Therefore, I seek out churches that use this version, and would be quite uncomfortable attending one that uses another version.
Does that make my beliefs comparable to cults, Catholocism, and mormonism? I think not. I came out of cults and mormonism and can assure you that trusting in the KJV is in no way comparable.
Ransom, isn't it also the version you use?
Now, if you guys are only referring to the tiny minority of extremists, why in the world didn't you qualify it in the statements? I could as well call all Baptists cults because some people followed the false leadership of...make your choice on that one (biting tongue), but I'd only be as accurate in doing so as you are in your comparison.
Gina -
An examination of the flaws of the Alexandrian texts provides a final authority.
Bob -
Bob Rogers said "Dr. Ruckman`s people argue on the basis of the texts. They never claim anything by their own authority! If you`ve read their books, you know their criticisms of the Alexandrian texts."
I have read their books, and I do know their criticisms of the Alexandrian texts. However, that is beside the point. Whether or not they explicitly claim anything by their own authority (they don't, because it would reveal their contradiction), they are promoting and defending a doctrine - the doctrine of KJV-onlyism. What is the "only" and "final" authority for matters of doctrine? They claim doctrine should only come from the KJV - then they turn around and make the claim itself into a doctrine, even though it came from them and not the KJV. Catholics do not use scripture as the only source of doctrine. KJVO folk do not use the KJV as the only source of doctrine - while claiming that the KJV is the only source of doctrine. At least the Catholics don't create this contradiction for themselves.
Bob Rogers said "Being KJV only provides a final authority."
No it doesn't, as I explained above. It claims a final authority, but it needs a second authority to make that claim in the first place.
Bob Rogers said "If your Bible isn`t the word of God, how do you know you`re doctrinally correct?"
Our Bibles are the word of God. We simply do not create a new, extra-Biblical doctrine that says that any particular translation is exclusively and inerrantly "the word of God".
Bob Rogers said "An examination of the flaws of the Alexandrian texts provides a final authority."
That is illogical. Maybe the Alexandrian texts are less trustworthy than the "received" text. That does nothing to prove the "received" text is perfectly inerrant, or that the KJV is a perfectly inerrant and exclusive translation. Do not confuse superiority with proof of inerrancy. -
-
Then it was a pretty silly post.
I could as well compare Islam with believing that drums don't have a place in Christian music.
Gina -
Origianally by Bob Rogers;
The laity in many but not all KJVO churches are rural and under-educated. I'm not saying this to be a snob it is just the situation as I have observed it. The pastors of these KJVO churches then only allow a Bible with a 12th grade reading level. The laity are left to believe only what the pastor says is Biblical, because, they don't have much ability to read the bible themselves. This is a similar situation to the history of the Roman Catholic church as Latin fell out of popular use in Europe. The Roman Church then adopted more and more false teachings. And the laity had to believe what the clergy said. Luther was able to protest these heresies because he could read their Bible in Latin.
Now don't get me wrong I love many of the KJVO's of the type I mentioned before many are in my own family. But they are unfamiliar with the issues and are unfamiliar with the Bible because they don't read it. I think the would read it more, if they had one that read more familiar to them like a MV.
I have two college degrees and I had to review my English gramer before I could read the KJV. It required a knowledge of nominative case and objective case, verb conjugations, syntax, vocabulary, etc. that differs (divers in KJV) from modern speech and writing. This is a difficult thing to do for the under-educated, so they simply just don't read the Bible. -
I`ve been connected with Bible quiz teams. The regionals and finals (not an exclusively Baptist organization) have NIV and KJV divisions. The KJV division has included home schooled children from Upstate New York. It`s also included a combination of home schooled and public education children from N.E. Ohio. I have seen the younger children stand up and quote up to 3 consecutive verses from the KJV without error. I know some, that could quote entire chapters. I have seen teens, that if given up to 5 words could figure out where it was from and quote the rest of the passage.
Bob -
I don't doubt that for a minute, and I think it is wonderful!
-
We gotta lighten up a little sometimes, Gina. All work & no play makes Johnny a dead boy.
It DOES get a little old...the KJVOs' blarney was proven wrong within weeks after first appearing, and now, over 30 years later, they still push the same ole stuff. A few people actually BELIEVED the myth, and the next generation of Onlyists have pulled the old dead ideas outta the garbage heap and placed them in new garbage bags, hoping to find someone else that might fall for it. Because the electronic media they used to spread their bunk is now being used against them, they're having difficulty acquiring the next generation of gossip-believers. -
These are the basic doctrines of the KJVO movement by the chief spokesman.
All other “scripture” in any language including the original Hebrew and Greek are at best inferior to the AV1611.
Notice also the Ruckman claims that God not only shut the door but slammed the door of revelation shut in 1611 and not 90AD (the completion of the NT canon).
What then to do with the “mistakes” (which he admits) that are present in the AV1611?
Another ex cathedra promulgation:Advanced Revelation
In a promotion of one of his books The Salient Verses, Dr. Ruckman says...
ALL KJVO believe these basic tenants.
Some are in denial. A few have the ability to be honest about it.
There is a litmus test set of questions concerning to determine if someone is KJVO.
1) What other version besides the KJV is the Word of God? Usually there will be no answer or a personal attack will ensue. Those who are honest will honestly say “none”.
2) Is the use of the word “easter” in Acts 12:4 correct? Usually there will be no answer or a personal attack will ensue. Those who are honest will honestly say “no”.
3) It has been my observation that those who are honest will, in addition, NOT make a personal attack against a non-KJVO person or their MV Bible. Rare but they exist.
The personal attack seems to be part of the KJVO agenda which follows after the preliminary attack against the MV's.
HankD
[ August 28, 2004, 10:21 AM: Message edited by: HankD ] -
...the KJVOs' blarney was proven wrong within weeks after first appearing, and now, over 30 years later, they still push the same ole stuff.
30 years later, eh? Hmmm~since I've been OKJV for all of the 50 years I've been saved, what about those missing 20 years? Oh, never mind, we all lived in ignorant bliss. :rolleyes: -
Actually King James was the first KJVO.
Besides persecuting and killing Anabaptist believers, for those who removed the apocrypha from the KJB he sentenced to a year in prison.
HankD -
Gina L asked:
Ransom, isn't it also the version you use?
Me? Never on a regular basis. The closest I come is the one or two churches I have attended in the past with KJVs in the pews, though I always followed along in my own Bible (NASB after 1993, NIV before).
I do quote the KJV on any Web pages I write, but this is out of convenience, nothing more. -
HankD quotes Dr. Petey:
In a promotion of one of his books The Salient Verses, Dr. Ruckman says...
Cool. Gnosticism is alive and well and being propagated in church-basement "Bible colleges." :rolleyes: -
I'm not that far from Bob and I've only seen one KJV church in which people were under educated, and there's only a handful of people there compared to the other KJV ones around.
Gina -
Bob Roger's story is wonderful, but I'm not sure what it proves.
When I was in grade 7, my whole class at school (about 25 of us) memorized and could recite the entire book of James upon request, word perfect - from the NIV. -
I`ve heard about the Russian Elizabeth Bible (a perfecting of the language of the Old Slavonic Bible into 18th century Russian under Peter the Great), but I`m not an expert on it.
The point to my story about the quizzers wasn`t to deny the abilities of the NIV quizzers. It was to point out, that even children can understand, memorize and quote the KJV. It doesn`t require an advanced learning level.
Bob -
Gina -
Bob Rogers:The Jewish Passover and the pegan Easter are close together and sometimes fall together. The passage appears to refer to the pegan Easter.
Please read the topic, "The Gipper shoulda Stuck to Football" in Page 4 of the archives to see why "Easter" in Acts 12:4 is a booboo.
Page 2 of 4