How did the Modern KJVO Movement Get Started?

[Dr. Bob]

New readers and others have wondered about the origins of the modern KJVO movement. Some attribute it to Ruckman in 1970 which was later (1980) picked up by Hyles and some pseudo-fundamentalists.

Anyone like to share?

Oh, btw, it WASN'T the Apostle Paul!

[ March 05, 2004, 12:33 PM: Message edited by: Dr. Bob Griffin ]

 

[Dan Todd]

Hey Doc!

I thought we Baptists went back to "John the Baptist!"

Maybe Herod had John's head removed because John was not KJVO!

Dan -

- looking ashamed for being so sacreligious!

 

[Dr. Bob]

Well, Dan, I'm sure everyone here has heard the old joke "I love the KJV. If it was good enough for the Apostle Paul, it's good enough for me!"

Sadly, today there are some who believe that!!

 

[skanwmatos]

The modern KJVO movement began with the publication of the "Revised English Version" by the American Baptist Publication Society in 1865. This "improved" version of the New Testament was the work of Alvah Hovey, John Broadus and Henry Weston.

It was the first English version translated from Greek texts other than the Textus Receptus (using the work of Greisbach and Lachmann - this was before the publication of the Greek Testament according to Westcott and Hort). Many Baptists took strong exception to the new version based on two criticisms, the first being the underlying Greek text, and the second being the abandonment of the word Baptize, etc., in favor of immerse, etc. This was considered tantamount to blasphemy to Baptists, particularly in the south, where Landmarkism was in full bloom.

The out cry against the REV was so great the American Baptist Publication Society issued another edition using the traditional words "baptize" etc., but the damage had already been done, and both editions failed to sell sufficient copies to pay for printing and publishing.

This created a reactionary sentiment among Baptists that "anything except the KJV" was a sign of the encroaching apostasy in the old Baptist Union and was considered by many to be the first step on the slippery slope to Theological Liberalism. This sentiment gained such a foot hold that even the ASV of 1901, which was heralded as "the rock of biblical honesty" failed to return the investment of its financial backers and was also soon abandoned.

Several later attempts, mostly by the real Theological Liberals, came along in the 1930s and 1940s, with only the Revised Standard Version ever selling enough to recoup production costs, and that only in the churches connected to the modernistic National Council of Churches.

It was not until the NIV that any modern version sold well enough to challenge the KJV. Even the NASB, though well received by many Evangelicals, never came close to the KJV in total annual sales.

 

[Dan Todd]

Dr. Bob,

I am aware of that - that's why I was being a bit sarcastic!

I enjoy reading the Psalms in the KJV - it may be because that is where I've read them since I was old enough to read them. They don't sound right in other versions - that's not the same as saying that they are wrong in other versions - it's saying that I am used to the sound and rythem of them in the KJV.

I suspect that if I had a thorough working knowledge of Hebrew - the language of their origin - that I would like them much better!

Dan - being serious - for once!

 

[michelle]

Peace and love to you all in Jesus Christ our Lord and Saviour!

Dr. Bob,

You do not believe that God has preserved Paul's actual words, or any other apostles and prophets words? If not, how then can you trust the Bible? How then do you trust what God has promised? How then can God hold us accountable for not obeying/keeping his word? How then can christians be in the unity of the Spirit? How then were the Israelites to know when their Messiah came, if their prophecies were not detailed descriptions, that had been preserved?

love in Jesus Christ our Lord and Saviour,
michelle

 

[Baptist in Richmond]

Originally posted by michelle:
You do not believe that God has preserved Paul's actual words, or any other apostles and prophets words? If not, how then can you trust the Bible? How then do you trust what God has promised? How then can God hold us accountable for not obeying/keeping his word? How then can christians be in the unity of the Spirit? How then were the Israelites to know when their Messiah came, if their prophecies were not detailed descriptions, that had been preserved?

Greetings: I am not sure that I follow you here.
Are you saying that God preserved His Word in the King James Version? If so:
Where is the Scriptural proof for such a contention?
Which King James Version do you use?
Additionally, why do you use that particular Version of the King James Bible?

Out of curiousity, when did Jack Hyles embrace KJV-Onlyism? Was he the only "Fundamentalist" to subscribe to this belief?

 

[Precepts]

So BIR, why is it "contention" with yall when we state the fact of the AV 1611 KJB as God's preserved Word? Seems the contention stems from the "other", not the Originator.

 

[michelle]

Peace and love to you all in Jesus Christ our Lord and Saviour!

Hiya Baptist in Richmond. I am saying that the text that underlines the KJV, the recieved text, which underlines many of the previous versions to it, are the preserved words of God. My scriptural proof is

Proverbs 14 in general, but specifically to

Proverbs 14:15
15 The simple believeth every word: but the prudent man looketh well to his going.

and ......

Psalm 12:6-7
6 The words of the LORD are pure words: as silver tried in a furnace of earth, purified seven times.
7 Thou shalt keep them, O LORD, thou shalt preserve them from this generation for ever.

As far as Hybels, I have only heard a little bit about him. For Ruckman, I don't know much about him. I only know what people have said of what he has said and believes regarding this issue. I think he is thinking in the extreme in some areas, and those things I disagree with, such as one is not saved if they use the mv's.

Love in Jesus Christ our Lord and Saviour,
michelle

 

[robycop3]

The modern KJVO monster began with the publication of SEVENTH DAY ADVENTIST leader Ben Wilkinson's 1930 book, Our Authorized Bible vindicated.I've read this book, checked out the errors pointed out in
http://www.kjvonly.org/doug/wilkinson_incred_pr.htm

and found that they really ARE errors or intentional falsehoods.(I didn't automatically take Kutilek's word for it! Anyone not believing what he says, do the research & footwork yourselves, and READ WILKINSON'S BOOK while you're at it!)

Most people simply ignored this book, and the articles written about it until 1955 when J.J.Ray made God Wrote Only One Bible. This book was largely based upon Wilkinson's book, with some codwallop of Ray's own added. Ray's publisher(now Grady Publications) gave that book much more publicity than Wilkinson's had received. That's when some Christians actually started BELIEVING this stuff.

Then, along came Dr. David Otis Fuller, who wrote Which Version? in 1970, then revising it several times.(I've read only the 1975 revision, so I can't comment on the earlier ones.)Basically, this volume is a revision of Wilkinson and Ray's stuff, with some of Fuller's own stuff injected. Basically, it's the same old garbage packed into a new dumpster, with a few more rotten eggs added.

Fuller was better-known than Ray was, and his innocently-titled book received more attention from the general public. And in 1973, the NIV was published, giving Fuller and other authors a cash cow with which to publish yet more literature.

There was a slow but sure change coming over the Onlyism myth. At first, it said that the KJV was the BEST BV in English, and many people agreed with that, as at that time there weren't too many reliable modern versions around. But the need for modern versions was clearly present as the English of the KJV was definitely left in the past. With the arrival of the NIV & the revision of the NASV, the tone of the growing numbers of KJVOs was changing. They began to proclaim that the KJV was the ONLY valid English BV there was, instead of merely the best, and their barge of hooey quickly filled up. Newer authors such as Ruckman, Riplinger, Moorman, Gipp, Cloud, Marrs, Watkins, Grady, Reagan, Hyles, & Waite, to name a few, jumped on the KJVO bandwagon to get in on the fun & profits before the fad died down. But basically, all their writings are built upon those who went before, whose stuff was long-ago proven false, and that they've taken and re-worded slightly to avoid plagiarism charges, added a few imaginations of their own, and placed between some colorful new covers to catch the eye of the casual bookstore shopper.

Unfortunately, there HAVE been some bogus bibles made during this time. The NWT has provided plenty of grist for the KJVO mill, as well as have such "versions" as the People's Bible, Phillips Edition, the Living Bible, etc. But the KJVO doesn't try to sort out the truth. He/she simply says, "if it aint the KJV, it's wrong".

Thus, KJVO has grown from an occasional book, article, or statement from some cleric saying "KJV is best" to the full-blown lie-filled monster it is today, in just 74 years. But, as more & more people now have easy access to the TRUTH through the Net, TV, & radio, I believe this monster will shrink back to what it once was-a mite.

 

[robycop3]

Sorry, Michelle, your Scriptural "proof" is lacking. First, there's NOT ONE WORD indicating God is limited to just one version, let alone suggesting the name of that version. Next, all these verses are found in every valid Bible version, old or new. Third, if Psalm 12:7 is about God's word, that's the end of the Onlyism myth, as all the previous English BVs before the KJV differ from it, and not just those that came later. The undeniable fact is that every English BV is different from any other, and since God preserved His word, He cannot be limited to having preserved it in just the one version, as differing versions existed BEFORE the KJV did.

The "provisional Bible" argument that says the English Bibles before the KJV were "provisional Bibles", filling in until that which is perfect-the KJV-came....is BLASPHEMY. That's saying that God did something which was IMPERFECT.

This is just another example of how the KJVO myth has mushroomed from a harmless thought by an occasional author into a full-fledged false doctrine full of guesswork, opinion, innuendo, double standards, and just plain LIES.

In the theme of this thread, Ben Wilkinson was the FIRST modern author to state that Ps. 12:6-7 was about the preservation of God's words. This very same thought has been used by virtually every KJVO author since then.

Once again, Michelle, BY WHOSE AUTHORITY are you KJVO? By whose authority do you tell me "I" should be? Where's your PROOF? Where's your EVIDENCE to support the KJVO myth?

 

[skanwmatos]

Originally posted by robycop3:
The modern KJVO monster began with the publication of SEVENTH DAY ADVENTIST leader Ben Wilkinson's 1930 book, Our Authorized Bible vindicated.

Why do you continue to ignore the facts of history? Why do you ignore the work of Broadus, Hovey, and Weston, and the reaction to their work of 1865, 65 years before Wilkinson's work? Why do you ignore the work of the American Baptist Publication Society, and the Southern Baptist Landmarker's response to that effort?

The truth is that KJVOism is much more deeply rooted among Baptists in America than you seem willing to admit. To many Baptists it goes right to the very core of their faith. They see KJVOism as the very backbone of the anti-modernist fights which came to a head around the turn of the 20th century and which was responsible for the birth of Fundamentalism as a movement. To lightly dismiss KJVOism as a recent phenomenon is to seriously underestimate how deep its root are and to so seriously underestimate a foe is sure path to failure.

 

[Orvie]

Originally posted by Precepts:
So BIR, why is it "contention" with yall when we state the fact of the AV 1611 KJB as God's preserved Word? Seems the contention stems from the "other", not the Originator.

Conjecture

 

[paidagogos]

Originally posted by robycop3:
Sorry, Michelle, your Scriptural "proof" is lacking. First, there's NOT ONE WORD indicating God is limited to just one version, let alone suggesting the name of that version. Next, all these verses are found in every valid Bible version, old or new. Third, if Psalm 12:7 is about God's word, that's the end of the Onlyism myth, as all the previous English BVs before the KJV differ from it, and not just those that came later. The undeniable fact is that every English BV is different from any other, and since God preserved His word, He cannot be limited to having preserved it in just the one version, as differing versions existed BEFORE the KJV did.

The "provisional Bible" argument that says the English Bibles before the KJV were "provisional Bibles", filling in until that which is perfect-the KJV-came....is BLASPHEMY. That's saying that God did something which was IMPERFECT.

This is just another example of how the KJVO myth has mushroomed from a harmless thought by an occasional author into a full-fledged false doctrine full of guesswork, opinion, innuendo, double standards, and just plain LIES.

In the theme of this thread, Ben Wilkinson was the FIRST modern author to state that Ps. 12:6-7 was about the preservation of God's words. This very same thought has been used by virtually every KJVO author since then.

Once again, Michelle, BY WHOSE AUTHORITY are you KJVO? By whose authority do you tell me "I" should be? Where's your PROOF? Where's your EVIDENCE to support the KJVO myth?

By what authority are you anti-KJVO? Where is your Scriptural proof?

I am astounded at your confidence in your own reasoning and delusions....uh.......I mean conclusions. Have at it! It's a stress-breaker (i.e. comic relief) for me to read your posts. Just thought I that I would put in a plug for the little lady whom you tried to run over.

 

[Jim Ward]

Originally posted by robycop3:
The modern KJVO monster began with the publication of SEVENTH DAY ADVENTIST leader Ben Wilkinson's 1930 book, Our Authorized Bible vindicated.I've read this book, checked out the errors pointed out in
http://www.kjvonly.org/doug/wilkinson_incred_pr.htm

and found that they really ARE errors or intentional falsehoods.(I didn't automatically take Kutilek's word for it! Anyone not believing what he says, do the research & footwork yourselves, and READ WILKINSON'S BOOK while you're at it!)

Most people simply ignored this book, and the articles written about it until 1955 when J.J.Ray made God Wrote Only One Bible. This book was largely based upon Wilkinson's book, with some codwallop of Ray's own added. Ray's publisher(now Grady Publications) gave that book much more publicity than Wilkinson's had received. That's when some Christians actually started BELIEVING this stuff.

Then, along came Dr. David Otis Fuller, who wrote Which Version? in 1970, then revising it several times.(I've read only the 1975 revision, so I can't comment on the earlier ones.)Basically, this volume is a revision of Wilkinson and Ray's stuff, with some of Fuller's own stuff injected. Basically, it's the same old garbage packed into a new dumpster, with a few more rotten eggs added.

Fuller was better-known than Ray was, and his innocently-titled book received more attention from the general public. And in 1973, the NIV was published, giving Fuller and other authors a cash cow with which to publish yet more literature.

There was a slow but sure change coming over the Onlyism myth. At first, it said that the KJV was the BEST BV in English, and many people agreed with that, as at that time there weren't too many reliable modern versions around. But the need for modern versions was clearly present as the English of the KJV was definitely left in the past. With the arrival of the NIV & the revision of the NASV, the tone of the growing numbers of KJVOs was changing. They began to proclaim that the KJV was the ONLY valid English BV there was, instead of merely the best, and their barge of hooey quickly filled up. Newer authors such as Ruckman, Riplinger, Moorman, Gipp, Cloud, Marrs, Watkins, Grady, Reagan, Hyles, & Waite, to name a few, jumped on the KJVO bandwagon to get in on the fun & profits before the fad died down. But basically, all their writings are built upon those who went before, whose stuff was long-ago proven false, and that they've taken and re-worded slightly to avoid plagiarism charges, added a few imaginations of their own, and placed between some colorful new covers to catch the eye of the casual bookstore shopper.

Unfortunately, there HAVE been some bogus bibles made during this time. The NWT has provided plenty of grist for the KJVO mill, as well as have such "versions" as the People's Bible, Phillips Edition, the Living Bible, etc. But the KJVO doesn't try to sort out the truth. He/she simply says, "if it aint the KJV, it's wrong".

Thus, KJVO has grown from an occasional book, article, or statement from some cleric saying "KJV is best" to the full-blown lie-filled monster it is today, in just 74 years. But, as more & more people now have easy access to the TRUTH through the Net, TV, & radio, I believe this monster will shrink back to what it once was-a mite.

Cranston, if they had a rule against lying in your posts, what ever would you have to post? Whatever would there be for us to laugh at from you?

In a word............ nothing.


Too bad you let your blind hatred for truth get in the way of your ability to comprehend anything you read.

What's even worse is I know you have this problem and here I am wasting time posting a reply to you.

 

[Jim Ward]

Originally posted by skanwmatos:
</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by robycop3:
The modern KJVO monster began with the publication of SEVENTH DAY ADVENTIST leader Ben Wilkinson's 1930 book, Our Authorized Bible vindicated.

Why do you continue to ignore the facts of history? Why do you ignore the work of Broadus, Hovey, and Weston, and the reaction to their work of 1865, 65 years before Wilkinson's work? Why do you ignore the work of the American Baptist Publication Society, and the Southern Baptist Landmarker's response to that effort?

The truth is that KJVOism is much more deeply rooted among Baptists in America than you seem willing to admit. To many Baptists it goes right to the very core of their faith. They see KJVOism as the very backbone of the anti-modernist fights which came to a head around the turn of the 20th century and which was responsible for the birth of Fundamentalism as a movement. To lightly dismiss KJVOism as a recent phenomenon is to seriously underestimate how deep its root are and to so seriously underestimate a foe is sure path to failure. </font>[/QUOTE]Cranston ignores the facts because he hates any truth that goes against what his self-styled god wants him to believe. He would rather hold to a myth that has been refuted and exposed as false so many times that it would be comical if not so sad.

Sadly, I've seen this time and again from him. What he should do is get out of the Bible debate, and stick with something he knows something about, that would be cult ministry.

 

[Baptist in Richmond]

Originally posted by Precepts:
So BIR, why is it "contention" with yall when we state the fact of the AV 1611 KJB as God's preserved Word? Seems the contention stems from the "other", not the Originator.

That is really quite easy: the KJVO are making a false claim that the Word of God can only be found in the English language in the 1769 Revision.

If the statement were simply "I prefer the 1769 Revision," then I would have no problem with such a statement. [I seem to recall that the late Dr. John R. Rice made a similar statement.] When some in the KJVO camp make the false claim that they use the 1611 Authorised Version (and a VERY high percentage of them do not use it) and dismiss all other English translations of God's Holy Word, then the preference becomes Unscriptural legalism. In other words, the "Originator" never made such a claim. Therein lies the basis for my utilization of the word "contention."

The Authorised Version is indeed the Word of God. I love the "AV 1611 KJB" more than any KJVO on this list, as I use the true "AV 1611 KJB" which has more than sixty six books. Despite this, I am not KJVO. My copies of the 1599 Geneva Bible (hardbound and electronic) alone totally refute KJV-Onlyism.

The simple fact is: NOBODY has ever proven Scripturally the validity of KJV-Onlyism.

 

[Baptist in Richmond]

Originally posted by Jim Ward:
Cranston ignores the facts because he hates any truth that goes against what his self-styled god wants him to believe. He would rather hold to a myth that has been refuted and exposed as false so many times that it would be comical if not so sad.

Sadly, I've seen this time and again from him. What he should do is get out of the Bible debate, and stick with something he knows something about, that would be cult ministry.

If you are espousing KJV-Onlyism, perhaps you could supply us with the Scripture to support this position.......

 

[just-want-peace]

Baptist in Richmond sez:

If you are espousing KJV-Onlyism, perhaps you could supply us with the Scripture to support this position.......

BiR, your coffee is gonna get cold if you wait for a forthright answer on this topic. You'll get a lot of dancing, backflips, and stutter-steps, but NO answer that you can take to the bank!

 

[Ed Edwards]

1996 (History of the KJVO movement)

I found a place in 1996 where there was
a bulletin board. It was the first
EZ Board i joined. EZ Boards has enrollment
for specific boards or for all boards
at once. I joined up for that specific
board. Later i found other EZ boards
of interest.