Featured Is the KJVO Movement Dying?

KJVO movement will not die out for a long, long time.

(1) We do not teach critical thinking anymore.

(2) As long as there is an internet presence believers will have to contend with those who have fallen into the trap of KJVOism.

(3) One of the failures of the children’s education in the church is a failure to teach doctrine.

Doctrinal education (at least in churches I’m familiar with) is decreasing, even as scholarly biblical knowledge increases.
You rarely hear the word, catechism, in churches anymore.
I guess the perception is that doctrine doesn’t attract kids to the church (they’d rather have a dinosaur themed kids camp instead).
As the children mature, even if they are believers, they will only have a simple faith, uncluttered by technical, boring doctrine; such knowledge confounds the simple.

Rob

 

Ray Batema was the Pastor of Central Baptist Church of Pomona, California in 1978.
I do not remember the year he left. The current Pastor is Tom Smith.

Currently I attend Highland Baptist Temple of Highland, California.

 

The Faith Baptist Church of Canoga Park California.
https://www.faithbaptist.org/beliefs

"We believe that all Scripture is given by inspiration of God, and that God has preserved His inspired words, which under His care and providence, have been translated without error in the King James Version. . . ."

 

David W. Daniels seems to be the main KJV-only author at Chick now. He is probably at least in his 60's and perhaps in his 70's.


Daniels, David W. Answers to your Bible Version Questions. Ontario, CA: Chick Publications, 2003.

Daniels, David W. Did the Catholic Church Give Us the Bible? Ontario, CA: Chick Publications, 2005.

Daniels, David W. 51 Reasons Why the King James. Ontario, CA: Chick Publications, 2018.

Daniels, David W. New King James The Bridge Bible. Ontario, CA: Chick Publications, 2020.

 

If I chose to be snarky I would say "so what." But i don't want to be and so I will just say that for the first 2500 years of human history not a single soul had the first word of inspired scripture. After that, only those of Israel had any scripture. You might say the Edomites and Ninevites had some prophecies about them but it was the preaching of Obadiah and Nahum to them and not the writing. What was said to them was written later and became books in the Hebrew OT scriptures and was written in Hebrew. I don't know what language they used in preaching to these guys but just for the fun of it try to imagine being a citizen of Nineveh and watching an old Jew get off his donkey on Front Street and start his street preaching with the following words;

1 The burden of Nineveh. The book of the vision of Nahum the Elkoshite.
2 God is jealous, and the LORD revengeth; the LORD revengeth, and is furious; the LORD will take vengeance on his adversaries, and he reserveth wrath for his enemies.
3 The LORD is slow to anger, and great in power, and will not at all acquit the wicked: the LORD hath his way in the whirlwind and in the storm, and the clouds are the dust of his feet.

This is not a salvation message and I think after hearing the sermon as a citizen I am looking for a road out of town.

What is my point? Bibles and scriptures are not for unsaved people else God would have given them out. Scriptures are for believers. Obadiah and Nahum were believers. The proof is they did the preaching. God trusted them with his words. Preaching is for the unsaved.

I do not know anything about China or Japan or Korea. except they are in the east. They are all Shemites. I know this is the year 2024 AD and Christianity was introduced early in the first century AD and all these eastern nations with their governments have been anti God and anti Christ for most of these centuries and I know that God the Father did not choose Paul, the apostle to the gentiles, to make one of his missionary campaigns to any of the people of the East or the South. God set him up in a church in Syria, the land of Abraham's nativity, as his base and he went to lands controlled by the Roman government, sons of Japheth. On his second missionary journey he had this great big world around him and where would he go, east, west, north, or south? God said for him to go west to Europe, and he did.

Here are the last words that Luke recorded Paul preaching to his countrymen, the Jews in the book of the Acts;

23 And when they (the Jews he had sent for) had appointed him a day, there came many to him into his lodging; to whom he expounded and testified the kingdom of God, persuading them concerning Jesus, both out of the law of Moses, and out of the prophets, from morning till evening.
24 And some believed the things which were spoken, and some believed not.
25 And when they agreed not among themselves, they departed, after that Paul had spoken one word, Well spake the Holy Ghost by Esaias the prophet unto our fathers,
26 Saying, Go unto this people, and say, Hearing ye shall hear, and shall not understand; and seeing ye shall see, and not perceive:
27 For the heart of this people is waxed gross, and their ears are dull of hearing, and their eyes have they closed; lest they should see with their eyes, and hear with their ears, and understand with their heart, and should be converted, and I should heal them.
28 Be it known therefore unto you, that the salvation of God is sent unto the Gentiles, and that they will hear it.

Who are the gentiles? Well, Paul said he was sent to the gentiles and he went west. I have tracked God in his scriptures and he always seems to move west. Who is in the west? the Japhetic families. He even says when he returns in the heavens he is as the lightening, from the east to the west. God even wrote his NT in a European language. The first non Jew who was saved by the gospel of Christ was an Italian soldier by the name of Cornelius. The people he has trusted from the beginning of the Christian era to believe his word and to preach it to others are those people in the west and I am glad that after 20 centuries the eastern nations are finally getting a Bible in their own languages but it sure seems to me like it is a westerner who has initiated it after some people there believed the preachers. those people need a Bible in their language now that they are saved. The church is called to be God's ambassadors to all nations and families and peoples.

I did not say it did but I will say the leaven can and does include Bible translations and paraphrases.

Well did they?

How broad is the word "Christian" and how are you defining it? I am very glad that these Asians are truly being saved but God did not make them the evangelists to the world during the first century. He said, and I quoted, he would send his salvation to those who will hear it.

 

Well, let's see. Jack Chick's crew is still around, but their memes are getting so ridiculous that few, if any, Christians believe them any more. Moorman and Melton are still kicking. Kizziah has been largely discredited. For years, Will Kinney has been hawking the KJVO myth, but he's fast falling apart and at last admitted the KJVO myth has no Scriptural support, a fact that renders it false.

The KJVO myth started out as a deep drive to left, but is fast hooking foul.

 

Well, if the King James Version Only thing does die out, what are all these guys going to do that post on here about it almost constantly? Some of them will have to finally" get a life" .

 

This passage continues to say, "how can they hear without a preacher and how can they preach except they be sent and how beautiful are the feet of them that preach the gospel of peace and bring glad tidings of good things?
They have not all believed our report, so then faith cometh by hearing and hearing by the word of God.

Did I miss something here John? Where is anything about the written word of God in this context? I have noticed that most times the posters here just read into passages what they want them to say. There is safety in believing the words of the scriptures and being faithful to them.

again, there is a context here and you need to keep reading.

21 Who by him (BY CHRIST) do believe in God (PRESENT TENSE), that raised him up from the dead, and gave him glory; that your faith and hope might be in God.
22 Seeing ye have (PAST TENSE) purified your souls in obeying the truth through the Spirit unto unfeigned love of the brethren, see that ye love one another with a pure heart fervently:
23 Being born again, not of corruptible seed, but of incorruptible, by the word of God, which liveth and abideth for ever.
24 For all flesh is as grass, and all the glory of man as the flower of grass. The grass withereth, and the flower thereof falleth away:
25 But the word of the Lord endureth for ever. And this is the word which by the gospel is preached unto you.

IOW, the word of the Lord is a person and we as Christians preach the person as salvation.

This passage serves to bolster my point that the written word of God is for saved people to instruct them how to walk and please God and to teach sound doctrine. These to whom Peter wrote his two letters were saved strangers, called the elect.

Peter, an apostle of Jesus Christ, to the strangers scattered ..... V2 Elect.... Peter was not writing to get people in that area saved but he wrote because they had been saved by believing the word of the Lord, the gospel.

I am trying to process this charge from you. Are you saying it is an insult to gospel ministries to believe what is written in the texts of scripture and to say so? I don't understand this charge who sets himself up as the smatest man in the room. I do know that only one gentile is recorded in scripture who was reading scripture and he was not saved by reading it. God sent a preacher to him or he would not have been saved that day. The story is in Acts 8. My position is not radical, it is biblical.

Maybe so. I am not saying they can't. I am only saying what God tells me is his MO in saving sinners. The first gentile to be saved, Cornelius did not have a Bible sent to him by God, a preacher was sent to him.

I am only saying what is clearly stated in scripture. Then it is demonstrated in the written account. The preachers went to the unsaved and preached the gospel to them and then wrote back later to instruct those who were saved. Look at any of the epistles and you will see that the author wrote to the churches in Paul's case, and to the strangers who were elect in Peter's case.

1 Cor 1:21 For after that in the wisdom of God the world by wisdom knew not God, it pleased God by the foolishness of preaching to save them that believe.

1 Corinthians 1:18
For the preaching of the cross is to them that perish foolishness; but unto us which are saved it (the preaching of the cross) is the power of God.

I can read and understand 5th grade English. If the scriptures teach that God has chosen writing or something else to save sinners will you please inform me of it. I promise if you are quoting the KJV I will believe it. As it is, I am believing the words I am reading. Why am I wrong to do that in your theological world?

Here is the most detailed staement of where the scripture is applied.

2 tim 3:16 All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness:
17 That the man of God may be perfect, thoroughly furnished unto all good works.

How much scripture? All of it.

Where is the unsaved man in this statement? What good would these things do an unsaved man. He needs something that will save him. The gospel preached by someone who has been saved will do the job.

 

This is the context of my quote to this poster. It just seems that he delivered the greatest slur of the two of us. I had given a number of clear and unambiguous scriptures from which I had formed my statements. Are they "radical" and insulting because I disagree with him? I do not understand this over the top reaction from this poster. My point has been that God sends his preachers first to preach the gospel using their own testimony of how God saved them and then sending his scriptures for instruction and knowledge of God to those who believe. Peter, in his first epistle was a great example of this. When a person is first saved by hearing and believing the gospel their knowledge of God is generally very limited, sort of like a baby who is first born and need strength. Look at what Peter said to those he wrote his scriptures to;

1 Pet 2:1 Wherefore laying aside all malice, and all guile, and hypocrisies, and envies, and all evil speakings,
2 As newborn babes, desire the sincere milk of the word, that ye may grow thereby:
3 If so be ye have tasted that the Lord is gracious.

Here is the contrast of the milk of the word and the meat.

Heb 5:14 But strong meat belongeth to them that are of full age, even those who by reason of use have their senses exercised to discern both good and evil.

Peter was writing to Christians, but babes. His scriptures would be beneficial to these babes for knowledge and strength. It would do nothing for the unsaved.

The apostle Paul, the apostle to the gentiles, and preaching without a written Bible, wrote letters back to the local churches they formed and gave the reason for his writing scripture to saved people. Here:

Rom 15:14 And I myself also am persuaded of you, my brethren, that ye also are full of goodness, filled with all knowledge, able also to admonish one another.
15 Nevertheless, brethren, I have written the more boldly unto you in some sort, as putting you in mind, because of the grace that is given to me of God,
16 That I should be the minister of Jesus Christ to the Gentiles, ministering the gospel of God, that the offering up of the Gentiles might be acceptable, being sanctified by the Holy Ghost.
17 I have therefore whereof I may glory through Jesus Christ in those things which pertain to God.
18 For I will not dare to speak of any of those things which Christ hath not wrought by me, to make the Gentiles obedient, by word and deed,

Paul writes 13 letters to gentile converts after they have believed the gospel to instruct them how to live and please God who saved them. Gentiles had no other instructions.

This is my point that is deemed radical and insulting to Bible translators and has me on at least one ignore list.

 

You improperly try to twist and misrepresent what the other poster stated. You clearly ignored and dismissed what he actually stated. Readers can clearly see that that poster plainly did not say something was insulting because you disagree with him.

His response directly referred to your bogus improper accusation against him as you accused him of setting himself up as "the smartest man in the room".

 

Would you say or suggest that "the leaven" includes the entire 1582 Roman Catholic Rheims New Testament?

Did the Church of England makers of the KJV include some "leaven" in their translation when they borrowed many renderings from the 1582 Roman Catholic Rheims New Testament?

By what process do you claim that the makers of the KJV removed all "the leaven" from the pre-1611 English Bibles of which the KJV is a revision?

By the way, your saying it does not prove your claim or assertion to be true and scriptural. Perhaps your opinion is incorrect.