Featured Are all Fundamental baptist churches KJO?

I wonder what those folks would do with the words that do not translate?

 

:laugh: Major dittos!

I just flew back from a missionary conference in New England where the IFB church used primarily the NASB. Starting Sunday I will be in another missionary conference where the church uses primarily the NKJV.

 

I expect this would be a typical Statement of Faith for independent Baptist fundamentalist KJVO churches. Note the assumption that God preserved the TR over and against the Byzantine Text, Majority Text, or Critical Text.

 

THE BIBLE
We believe the Bible to be the complete Word of God; that the sixty-six books, as originally written, comprising the Old and New Testaments were verbally inspired by the Spirit of God and were entirely free from error; that the Bible is the final authority in all matters of faith and practice and the true basis of Christian union.

This is the brief statement about the Bible by our Fellowship of Evangelical Baptist Churches in Canada.

For all my years, the KJV was the main Bible, but we never made any claims about that version being without fault. Most pastors rested on the Hebrew and Greek learned in seminary and help from many translations available, to arrive at the truth of God's Word....found only in the original manuscripts,,wherever they happen to be.

Cheers,

Jim

 

We had one post that claimed 25 to 30% of "independent" baptist churches were KJVO churches. What I am wondering is if the word "fundamentalist" in the title is not code for KJV perferred or only, i.e. is it possible that over 90% of "independent fundamentalist Baptist" churches are KJVO or KJVP?

 

You will notice that we used the term "Evangelical" in our name. To-day, however, even that term, "evangelical" is suspect. We just can't change everything in a name.

Also, we could have used "Fundamentalist" as we did through the years we were fighting against modernism and liberal theology.

Some get too tied up to labels, including KJVO. In my copy of the KJV, you will find many corrections and marginal notes. When I quote from it, I read it as it has been corrected without giving my reasons from the pulpit. Let people ask me in private, one-on-one; much easier to explain the differences or clarifications in my version.

Cheers,

Jim

 

Oooh, Salty, you found a can of worms to open. :smilewinkgrin: My experience? In most IFB churches there appears to be a "don't ask don't tell policy." So I rarely ask a church's position, and they rarely ask mine. But the more radical the church is, the more likely they are to ask.

 

reminds me of the time when AN IBF church member invited me to attend their church grand reopenning, and only thing he told me was "be sure" to wear my suite and take ONLY the KJV!

The police chief read the dedication from Solomon to the temple in the OT, but read it out loud in his NIV version!

ONLY time that bible ever was read in sanctuary, but thought it was neat that God made it so that something other than the KJV was read!

Shows that He has a sense of humour, and thinks that other versions valid too!

 

And who's going to argue with the chief of police? :smilewinkgrin:

 

No they are not, however most are. I know what you mean about the Bible Translation issue. Many IFB pick on the NIV because its the most popular, but a church I once attended attacked the ESV as well as the NIV.

 

I Wonder

If we could transport Peter Ruckman and the KJVO only people to 1511 - I wonder what their message would be?:BangHead:

 

How about IF they were the first group to get hold of the brand new Geneva bible, would that be the word of God to them, and would have burnt the KJV?

 

NO harm done...I have been reading, and I observe. If a church doesn't preach that HELL is real, and that a person must REPENT, then the message is skewed and wrong.

And that doesn't mean that a person can go right back to sinning - repentance is changing direction!

 

rather than being for or against kjo,
why not google logic behind kjo and then decide

i've never met anyone who with sincerity in search for the truth googled this subject
and stayed non-kjv believer

i was really into HCSB version
then i read this
http://www.scionofzion.com/hcsb_exposed.htm
now im back to kjv

but not good to bash each other over anything
we must debate lovingly but not offending each other

i once posted an opinion here
but got flooded with offenses and insults by dr.bob
many felt so bad i got personal emails apologizing for his hostility

he later got rid of post
many stopped using the forum
but i stayed

debating smong chritian is okay
offending each other is pure hipocricy

what say you?

 

I did not want to take much time on that website because usually they are filled with SYI.

So I took a look at one I thought to be wrong--Mt. 19:9. The word translated fornication in the KJV and sexual immorality is a word that includes all kinds of sexual immorality or perversion. It includes far more than just fornication and adultery.

 

This is simply untrue. Many use the KJV, but only a small minority are. I have been associated with a couple of hundred IFB churches and the vast majority do not fit the description.

 

that is why its really foolish to have a view that JUST the KJV or NIV or NASB etc is THE word of God for us today, as they all have NOT exactly rendered the origianl texts to us, due tothe fact justimpossible to get exact meanings/understandings from greek/hebrew into English versions!

 

Major dittos. :thumbsup: