-
Welcome to Baptist Board, a friendly forum to discuss the Baptist Faith in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to all the features that our community has to offer.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!
Are most Fundamental Baptists Churches KJVO then?
- Thread starter JesusFan
- Start date
I can only speak for my experience in Churches where I know folks and visit for revivals in the NC/SC area of the nation.
It's not so much that they believe it's perfect, they believe it is the version God wants us to have and use.
In all of these Churches which are IFB that I know, they use only the 1611 KJV.
I was raised in an IFB from a child as far back as I can remember, I suppose the reason I have never used another version.
If you're not in that atmosphere you can't understand it. But I can't see where anyone has ever gone wrong with the 1611 KJV.
(...that explains a lot...)
LOL, I guess it does.
There are extremes in every denomination. Let me show you how silly it can get with the KJV in the IFB ranks.
Some years ago, a person well know and liked by many passed away. The Church he was a member of was not IFB, and the preacher of that Church used the NIV.
There were some, a few, who debated whether to go to the funeral because the preacher was a NIV user.
But these are the extremes ever how silly they many be.
The overwhelming majority of these folks (IFB) are not extreme, they just like their 1611 KJV.
It was the Bible their parents, grand parents, great grand parents, etc. used.
I am not against using the 1611 Kjv, but think majority of those using Kjv actually are using later editions like 1769 or 1873
I was a good friend of someone in IFB church, who invited me to attend their dedication day for the new church building, and he just asked me to please wear a suite and take a Kjv. The Police Chief of town gave dedication prayer, and he read the OT passage of Solomon dedicating the Temple out of NIV, and the pastors and elders facial expression looked like they just smelt limburger cheese
I've never seen a 1769 or 1883 KJV, I've never used anything but the 1611.
The NIV is the most disliked version by the fundamentalists.
I don't so much worry about it, but some of them can show you every single difference in the KJV vs NIV.
Are you sure, as most say they use the 1611 Kjv, but not really are using that version
My point was that God has a sense of humor, as he allowed the one version to be used that really bugged them
Yes, after almost 60 years I'm pretty sure it's a 1611 KJV.
Historic fundamentalist would NOT be "only" any man-made translation. The Bible is verbally, fully inspired and inerrant. NO ENGLISH TRANSLATION can make that claim.
We (I am openly a Fundamentalist) feel that much of the KJVonly sect (on the BB we forbid the use of the word "cult" unless referring to an identified cult like Jehovah's Witness, Mormon, Oneness Pentecostal) beliefs are an ATTACK on the doctrine of inspiration. We will not cooperate or fellowship with such vile conduct and reprove them for this error.
God did NOT breath His exact perfect inerrant inspired words to 40 Anglicans in 1611. To give man's work such is blasphemy and God's judgment guaranteed.
BTW, I love the KJV1769 Oxford revision. Use it with my Scofield Reference Bible. So I am not attacking a good (but FAR from perfect) English translation of God's Words.
We (I am openly a Fundamentalist) feel that much of the KJVonly sect (on the BB we forbid the use of the word "cult" unless referring to an identified cult like Jehovah's Witness, Mormon, Oneness Pentecostal) beliefs are an ATTACK on the doctrine of inspiration. We will not cooperate or fellowship with such vile conduct and reprove them for this error.
God did NOT breath His exact perfect inerrant inspired words to 40 Anglicans in 1611. To give man's work such is blasphemy and God's judgment guaranteed.
BTW, I love the KJV1769 Oxford revision. Use it with my Scofield Reference Bible. So I am not attacking a good (but FAR from perfect) English translation of God's Words.
KJB1611reader
Member
Mock on
I have several Bibles, old from my childhood and new from just a few years ago.
Every one of them is a Authorized KJV 1611.
Yes, it has been updated from the original spelling, punctuation, but the core message is the same.
That's why these Bibles clearly state KJV 1611. It has the exact same core message after the updates.
The true 1769 KJV has marginal notes throughout.
As I have stated before, I've never seen one.
If you buy a 1769 KJV you are buying a Bible that has more changes than just the spelling and punctuation of the original 1611.
Last edited:
Baptizo
Active Member
I don’t recall it being disliked that much prior to the 2011 revision.
The first revision was in "84 and that's what really started the Fundamentalists on a rampage.
If you want the details, just lookup why the fundamentalists dislike the NIV.