IFB & the KJVO myth...

[robycop3]

I'm IFB, belonging to a church that doesn't believe any man-made doctrines of faith/worship, & that includes the KJVO myth. However, this false doctrine seems to be associated with IFB in general, much-more-so than in just about any other branch of Baptist worship. (And the KJVO myth seems associated with Baptists of all types more than it does with any other denomination.)

I'm wondering how this came about, as IFB generally rejects all man-made doctrines of faith/worship, & the KJVO myth is definitely man-made.

 

[McCree79]

I'm IFB, belonging to a church that doesn't believe any man-made doctrines of faith/worship, & that includes the KJVO myth. However, this false doctrine seems to be associated with IFB in general, much-more-so than in just about any other branch of Baptist worship. (And the KJVO myth seems associated with Baptists of all types more than it does with any other denomination.)

I'm wondering how this came about, as IFB generally rejects all man-made doctrines of faith/worship, & the KJVO myth is definitely man-made.

I honestly think it came about because of the mindset you listed above "rejecting man-made" doctrines and practices. I think they see the NIV, ESV and even the NKJV as man-made products changing God's word. They see the ECM (NA/UBS) as man-made, therefore rejecting all translation based on it. They however fail to see the TR was made with many of the textual principles and the NA/UBS. It just involved a much smaller scope of manuscript evidence. But they accept the TR because they don't see or hear about man's hands being involved. They accept the KJV because they are so far divorced from its inception and don't see man's hands involved.

They want a bible they can claim like the Muslims do with Qur'an. The KJV basically fell from heaven in their minds. Though they will not say that. They will say it was purified by the Holy Spirit.

Sent from my SM-G965U using Tapatalk

 

[JonC]

I'm IFB, belonging to a church that doesn't believe any man-made doctrines of faith/worship, & that includes the KJVO myth. However, this false doctrine seems to be associated with IFB in general, much-more-so than in just about any other branch of Baptist worship. (And the KJVO myth seems associated with Baptists of all types more than it does with any other denomination.)

I'm wondering how this came about, as IFB generally rejects all man-made doctrines of faith/worship, & the KJVO myth is definitely man-made.

I attended an IFB church that held the position. The pastor explained that they were “King James Only”, not “King James Ugly” (they did not condemn people for using other translations, per se).

His reasoning is that he has to be able to hold a Bible and say that it is the Word of God. He explained that he could not do this if he believed that more than one translation was God’s Word. He also explained that he believes the doctrine of “double inspiration” is a heresy and that is something he does not hold or teach.

My explanation to him was that I hold the Word of God as Scripture when I hold the KJV. But I also do so when I hold a NASB, NIV, or ESV. My reasoning is that these are translations and must be studied as translations. I also explained that, while denying “double inspiration” I do not see how he could get around it as a logical conclusion.

I do not attend that church (although I would not be opposed to visit). The pastor and I get along very well. This is the only IFB church that I've attended at any length. They were a little too much on the legalistic side for me (in matters of girls wearing dresses, boys wearing ties, etc.) but the KJO part is why I felt it inappropriate for me to seek membership. They were wonderful people AND God was using that church in great ways in the community. They are a healthy church and expanding by adding a new building this year.

I say this to point out that their identity was not in legalism or "KJO-ism" but in Christ. I've witnessed many dead and dying churches (both IFB and SBC) and each time it seems that they are failing for taking their eyes off Christ and focusing instead on some religious aspect as they seek a particular set of doctrines or on the world. Both can be equally unhealthy.

 

[robycop3]

One factor may be that Drs. D. O. Fuller, & Peter S. Ruckman, two of the most-notorious KJVOs, were both Baptists.

 

[McCree79]

One factor may be that Drs. D. O. Fuller, & Peter S. Ruckman, two of the most-notorious KJVOs, were both Baptists.

One of our more local issues is that a Ruckmanite is the President of a local Christian School. Many of the kids coming out of it believe the KJV is the only way.

Sent from my SM-G965U using Tapatalk

 

[HankD]

I'm IFB, belonging to a church that doesn't believe any man-made doctrines of faith/worship, & that includes the KJVO myth. However, this false doctrine seems to be associated with IFB in general, much-more-so than in just about any other branch of Baptist worship. (And the KJVO myth seems associated with Baptists of all types more than it does with any other denomination.)

I'm wondering how this came about, as IFB generally rejects all man-made doctrines of faith/worship, & the KJVO myth is definitely man-made.

When living in Massachusetts right after I was married we went to an Independent Baptist Church that was KJVO (but rejected the excesses of Ruckman).

The pastor was from a Plymouth Brethren background and brought the doctrine with him.

 

[robycop3]

One of our more local issues is that a Ruckmanite is the President of a local Christian School. Many of the kids coming out of it believe the KJV is the only way.

Sent from my SM-G965U using Tapatalk

It's our job as Freedom Readers to prove him wrong.

 

[robycop3]

When living in Massachusetts right after I was married we went to an Independent Baptist Church that was KJVO (but rejected the excesses of Ruckman).

The pastor was from a Plymouth Brethren background and brought the doctrine with him.

I didn't know the PB believed that junk.

'Tis strange that people who say they don't believe any man-made doctrines of faith/worship believe the KJVO myth, which is COMPLETELY man-made.

 

[HankD]

I didn't know the PB believed that junk.

'Tis strange that people who say they don't believe any man-made doctrines of faith/worship believe the KJVO myth, which is COMPLETELY man-made.

Yes apparently there was a small branch of the Brethren who did not like John Nelson Darby treatment of the KJV and separated as KJVO.

 

[Squire Robertsson]

There's been push back against Wescott and Hort since the days of Dean John Burgeon. It simmered along as a sideshow until the publishing of the NASB in the early 70s. This happened after fifty years of conflict with the Modernists over Inspiration. Not to mention the kerfuffles in the SBC. Additionally, there was a reliance on pastoral education that left out any training in Greek. It was considered enough for a man to have a Strong's' Concordance, a Naves Topical Bible and Vines Expository Dictionary to help him prepare messages from his Bible.

So, it's 1974. I've pastored Willow Run Baptist for fifteen years. I'm a graduate of Zion Baptist Bible Institute. Now, I'm hearing that the Bible I've preached from isn't up to snuff.

It's men like that that were open to the teaching of men like Jack Hyles. From my POV, when the Bus Ministry and Sunday School could no longer support his celebrity, Hyles latched onto the KJVO movement. And gas is added to the fire.

 

[Reformed]

In many ways, KJVO is just as dangerous as Roman Catholicism; blind trust in authority and no questions asked. Everything fits in a neat little box and any criticism is to be treated as a satanic attack.

 

[robycop3]

The truth against the KJVO myth is very simple: IT HAS NO SCRIPTURAL SUPPORT, even in the KJV itself. That fact alone renders it false. There's simply no substitute for Scripture.

While the KJV is an excellent translation that's served English users well for over 400 years, it's not perfect, and GOD is NOT limited to it in English. We IFBs reject every other man-made doctrine of faith/worship, such as regenerational baptism, annihilationism, oneness/modalism, "name it/claim it", & all the other man-made "isms" that Satan has invented, and that's why I find it strange that many IFBs accept the KJVO myth, which is just as man-made & false as the others named above.

Now, there's nothing wrong with one preferring to use the KJV, but there's PLENTY wrong with telling someone the KJV is the ONLY valid English Bible translation out there. Satan has succeeded in using that myth to cast a pall over IFB, making it look bad in the eyes of many new Christians seeking a church home. It's important that we tell the truth about KJVO to as many as possible, especially from an IFB view. More people need to know that the likes of Stephen Anderson or the late Dr. Peter S. Ruckman do NOT represent the IFBs as a whole.

 

[Salty]

robycop3 - Why do you think some folks are so gun-ho on KJO- and its thinking it is a perfect translation and that any other version is a "Pervision"

 

[MartyF]

I'm IFB, belonging to a church that doesn't believe any man-made doctrines of faith/worship, & that includes the KJVO myth. However, this false doctrine seems to be associated with IFB in general, much-more-so than in just about any other branch of Baptist worship. (And the KJVO myth seems associated with Baptists of all types more than it does with any other denomination.)

I'm wondering how this came about, as IFB generally rejects all man-made doctrines of faith/worship, & the KJVO myth is definitely man-made.

In the community (smaller than a hamlet) my grandmother lived in there was a local IFB Church. I don't agree with them on everything, but my mother attends and they helped with the burial of my grandmother and help to maintain the graveyard.

While not officially a KJVO church, they do believe that the KJV is the word of God while the other Bible version are lesser. This includes the pastor who does not have a theological degree but was an administrator at a school.

So, if anyone talked to someone at this church, they would get KJVO vibes.

 

[robycop3]

robycop3 - Why do you think some folks are so gun-ho on KJO- and its thinking it is a perfect translation and that any other version is a "Pervision"

Mainly, because they've been misled by either reading the pro-KJVO junk of at least one pro-KJVO author, or have a pastor who was thus influenced from KJVO literature.The other reason is that they were raised on the KJV, or came to Jesus thru reading the KJV or hearing preaching from it. No one who SERIOUSLY studies the issue and learns the TRUTH remains KJVO.

 

[robycop3]

In the community (smaller than a hamlet) my grandmother lived in there was a local IFB Church. I don't agree with them on everything, but my mother attends and they helped with the burial of my grandmother and help to maintain the graveyard.

While not officially a KJVO church, they do believe that the KJV is the word of God while the other Bible version are lesser. This includes the pastor who does not have a theological degree but was an administrator at a school.

So, if anyone talked to someone at this church, they would get KJVO vibes.

Seems they've picked up that false doctrine from somewhere. They'll be stumped if asked for SCRIPTURAL SUPPORT for the KJVO myth. That's the ace of trumps that "wins" any KJVO discussion.

 

[Pastor_Bob]

In many ways, KJVO is just as dangerous as Roman Catholicism; blind trust in authority and no questions asked. Everything fits in a neat little box and any criticism is to be treated as a satanic attack.

How, in your opinion, is KJVO dangerous? If one believes that the Bible they hold in their hands is the inspired, preserved Word of God, and submit to it as their final authority, how is that dangerous?

 

[Reformed]

How, in your opinion, is KJVO dangerous? If one believes that the Bible they hold in their hands is the inspired, preserved Word of God, and submit to it as their final authority, how is that dangerous?

Bob, I am focusing on the ONLY part and the fanaticism some KJVO advocates display. When they say that only the KJV is the word of God they put themselves into a radical minority that views those who prefer the NASB, NIV, and ESV to be enemies of the gospel. Of course, there are KJVO'ers that are less fanatical but the movement does have its cultish overtones.

 

[Reformed]

@Pastor_Bob , I do not have a problem with someone who says they prefer the KJV. My issue is when they say that only the KJV is the word of God. I have run into a few of these people and it is almost as if they are brain washed.

 

[Pastor_Bob]

Bob, I am focusing on the ONLY part and the fanaticism some KJVO advocates display.

There are, without question, those who I would classify as "rabid" KJVO. I, and men like me, distance ourselves from these types, although we tend to all get lumped into the same category. Rabid KJVOs would believe that no one can be saved apart from hearing the gospel from a KJV Bible. Rabid KJVOs would teach that a missionary must teach their people to read the English in order to be saved or that their Bible must be translated from the KJV as opposed to the original languages. I am not in this group. I believe that God preserved His Word for us who speak English, but the English does not supersede the Greek