Would you allow KJVOists to teach Sunday School?

That's how I taught.

 

Am i the only one thinking there is something realy sad about being divisive on so idiosyncratic a matter?

 

Um... Billwald?

Y'all mean.. I'm the only one who has read it
and understands it?
*faints*

anyway.. yes I would allow them to teach SS

There are many things that go into that mix..
all should be taken into account. Not just the
Bible preferance.

sez Mark... who knows Godly people that use other
versions..

cheers,
mark
<><

 

Mark when you go to the versions forum and read what the KJVO's Have to say and how they say it you might want to reconsider.It's the general spirit they seem to carry that bothers me.I am KJV preferred.I am not against the KJV of the Bible.I think I get it.I just have a different view.

 

We have a dear sweet lady in our church who is KJVO. She started teaching 3rd grade SS a few months ago and has just resigned b/c the curriculum isnt KJV. She says she cant "bear witness" with the KJV. (But its actually the Holman Standard that is in this quarter's material.) There are about 5 KJVOs in our church, and that is fine. Some got incensed awhile back b/c DH doesnt preach from it - saying he is using one of "them modern versions thats wrong", he simply showed them his version - the original languages. And now he is going to be teaching a beginning Greek class starting in January. Hopefully that will help.

 

I agree here.

I also believe that it is important to consider the nature of the disease that causes people to be KJO. From my point of view, by the time the disease has reached such a serious stage that the patient is a firm KJOist, the disease has become so severe that it would be extremely dangerous to have such a patient in a position of authority of any kind in any church. And I certainly do not believe that they should be allowed to have any kind of contact with minors or new converts. Indeed, they are not allowed to be on the property of my church unless they have submitted to the church board documentation to prove that they are under the care of a psychiatrist who specializes in that disease and who has had good success in curing it. Perhaps the $3,000,000,000 in stem cell research grants that the California voters approved this month will result in the find of a permanent cure for everyone suffering from this most dreadful, disgusting, damaging disease before our Baptist churches are declared to be a threat to national security.

 

I'll try to wander over that way soon...

 

It's wrong to lump people together like that. I have heard strong arguments and bad attitudes on BOTH sides. Having said that...



Have a blessed Thanksgiving everyone!

§ue

 

In answer to the opening question:

NO! In no way, shape, form, or fashion would I ever knowingly allow someone who espouses King James Version Onlyism to teach Sunday School or hold any ofice or leadership position in the church.

KJVOism is a man-made extra-biblical doctrine. It takes the position of elevating a work of man to equal status with divinity. And, if anyone does not believe that, follow the advice above and go to the Bible Versions forum and read what some of the supporters of this heresy have spewed forth.

Would you allow a Jehovah's Witness or a Mormon to teach Sunday School? Basically the same thing...

In Christ,
Trotter

 

Trotter said....

"Would you allow a Jehovah's Witness or a Mormon to teach Sunday School? Basically the same thing...
"

really? I find that statement to be very interesting considering some of the KJV only types
I know..
As I stated it is a mixture of many things that should be
taken into consideration for SS teachers..

ttfn,
mark

 

I do not think they should teach if this is part of their teaching topic. If the KJVO advocates knew the entire history of this translation and more knowledge of the other translations they would not be so narrow minded. The KJV is the word, just like most of the others!

 

A casket would cure that disease. Probably some will go with the uptaker and others with the undertaker.

 

I think there is one great cure to prevent anyone from being in teaching positions first.

In one church I pastored I told the people that in order for one to be a leader he or she had ot prove their leadership first by proving themselves first. Nobosy would be given any leadership positions until the started leading others in Bible study. It was amazing how many leaders came out of that. Leaders are not leaders because of position and seat time but because they have proven themselves to be leaders by others who look to them for leadership.

 

With all due respect DHK, unless I've missed some exchanges in an earlier forum which predisposes you to answer Seth this way, it is you who appears contentious. The original topic starter has at least 5 questions in it which appear to solicit some commentary. Seth obviously holds to a position that is open to the KJVO teaching in church and the original topic starter probably inferred the same but Seth desrves the right to reply and qualify his answer. Your use of word "epistle" for his 2-3 paragraphs reveals something more going on than just his reply post.

Otherwise all answers should be: yes, no, no, yes, yes, for example.

I believe one who teaches in a church has by membership, the responsibility to support the church's statement of faith and constitution. If they wear their KJVO 'ism on their sleeve, so that no matter what their endeavor, they are coming back to endless argument over Bible versions then they are not a good candidate for this ministry. However, if they can open the scripture to children in the faith and teach many of the wonderful things of God's word then why not?

 

Well, I think it depends on what the church believes. If the church believes you should only use the KJV, then of course they should let a SS teacher teach from it. If the church beleives that the KJV is wrong, then they shouldn't let one preach from it. The teachers should use the same Bible the Pastor does.

 

Can you explain this comment? If I understand you are saying that 50% of people who are KJV only never read it and dont understand it? Where did you get your info on this statistic? Can you post your source? What is the basis of your suspicions?

 

What he meant was the 50% of the people who only read the KJV never read it. lol, that's a very intellegent statement.