How did the Modern KJVO Movement Get Started?

[Ed Edwards]

1967 (History of KJVO movement)

IN 1967 I was at Charleston, South Carolina
in the military. I'm on shifts and on changing
shifts. So i frequently get to listen
to the morning preaching on radio.

One preached against the latest MV at the
time. I sent off to him for a pamplet
showing the errors in the new MV. I got
the pamplet in the mail. On the
back, stamped and added to the pamplet
was the address of a KJV salesman.

 

[Ed Edwards]

Originally posted by robycop3:
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.

Amen, Brother Robycop3 -- Preach it!

That is sure what it looked like.
I lived thru it all while it was going
on, just like you called it.

 

[Ed Edwards]

Welcome to the Version forum, Bro. Jshurley!

I got saved in APril 1952 and joined
a Southern Baptist Church (SBC).
I've seen 98% of the history of KJVO-ism
with my own eyes.

The SBC wasn't ever into KJVO stuff -- we were two busy
witnessing to lost souls for Jesus.
A Million More in '54!

 

[skanwmatos]

Originally posted by Ed Edwards:
I got saved in APril 1952 and joined
a Southern Baptist Church (SBC).
I've seen 98% of the history of KJVO-ism
with my own eyes.

Let's see. 1865 to 2004 = 139 years. 1952 to 2004 = 52 years. Last time I checked, 52 years is not 98% of 139 years. Let me guess. You were not a math major, were you?

 

[Ed Edwards]

Originally posted by skanwmatos:
</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by Ed Edwards:
I got saved in APril 1952 and joined
a Southern Baptist Church (SBC).
I've seen 98% of the history of KJVO-ism
with my own eyes.

Let's see. 1865 to 2004 = 139 years. 1952 to 2004 = 52 years. Last time I checked, 52 years is not 98% of 139 years. Let me guess. You were not a math major, were you? </font>[/QUOTE]Actually I am a math
major. 2 guys in 1876 and 20,000 wandering
KJBOs in 1986, yep, it averages up to
98% of the history of KJBOism happend
from 1952 to 2004.

What is your testimony?

The come 1979 and i get a HOT COPY of
SABOTAGE? (Chick, 1979).
(the answer BTW is "no")

I looked for the books in 1979-1983,
the ones that are referenced there
(These books have also been referenced above)
I couldn't find them.)

They are very much like the 4,000 books
on Atlantis, they all reference each other
AND NOTHING ELSE. So here you have
some KJVO books that cross-reference each
other AND NOTHING ELSE.

 

[skanwmatos]

Originally posted by Ed Edwards:
2 guys in 1876 and 20,000 wandering
KJBOs in 1986, yep, it averages up to
98% of the history of KJBOism happend
from 1952 to 2004.

I am not sure where you are getting your statistics, but I am fairly certain there were more than 2 people opposed to the REV of 1865. I doubt only 2 people could bring about its failure.

As to there being 20,000 in 1986, again, I and not sure where you get that number, but I suspect there not only were not that many in 1986, I doubt there are that many now.

 

[Ed Edwards]

Sigh, the numbers are not researched,
they are "for example".
There are lot more KJBOs now then
there were 100 years ago.

In THE RESURGENCE OF CONSERVATIVE CHRISTIANITY
Ed Dobson, Ed Hindson, and Jerry Falwell
note that one problem the conservatives
have is "Elevation of minor issues".
This includes KJVO and wearing pants.

I understand that Jerry Falwell was a
successful IFB. So the IFB booted him out
of their organization. Now Jerry Falwell
has more people in his church than
½ the IFBs in the country

 

[Ed Edwards]

Originally posted by skanwmatos:
As to there being 20,000 in 1986, again, I and not sure where you get that number, but I suspect there not only were not that many in 1986, I doubt there are that many now.

Uh Oh, the KJBOs heard that
Duck Scan! INCOMING!

 

[tinytim]

Robycop, I appreciated your post. I even clipped it for my research.
Skan, thank you for your comments I will also research what you said.

I don't doubt there were KJVO all the way back to 1611, I figure the translators were pretty proud of their work!

But growing up IFB, I never heard of the controversy until around 1990.
I was never in a church that billed itself as KJV1611 only until 1997.

We never questioned other versions growing up.
the NIV existed. as did the Living Bible.
I do remember my dad not liking the living bible. but he was not KJVO.

I too seem to side with Roby, and ED.
Just from my experience in central WV.
But of course everything in Central WV is behind the times.
Why, I've heard of this heer contraption that will let a person talk into a box and they can be heard miles away. Can't wait until I get meself one.

 

[mioque]

"I don't doubt there were KJVO all the way back to 1611, I figure the translators were pretty proud of their work!"
And now I'm going to disagree with Tim a little.
judging from the preface of the 1611 AV , the translators were AVpreferred but certainly not AVonly.

 

[Archangel7]

Originally posted by Dr. Bob Griffin:

New readers and others have wondered about the origins of the modern KJVO movement.

&lt;With tongue planted firmly in cheek&gt; Didn't the KJVO movement begin when King James I doubted the "pure, perfect, preserved word of God in English" -- the 1560 Geneva Bible? "Yea, hath God in deede said..."

 

[Archangel7]

Originally posted by paidagogos:

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

Actually, there *is* Scriptural proof against any kind of "One Version Onlyism." We have the example of Philip, who used a different version of Isaiah to preach Christ to the Ethiopian eunuch (see Ac. 8:26-35, Isa. 53:7-8). We also have the example of Jesus Himself, who saw no problem with reading from a different version of Isaiah in his hometown synagogue (see Lk. 4:16-21, Isa. 61:1-2).

If Jesus and the apostles had no qualms about using a different version, why should we?

 

[Ed Edwards]

1992 (Ed's short & personal
history of the KJVO movement)

I visited teh Bible Museum
in Eureka, Arkansas. In this collection
they even have an Adulter's Bible,
the one with the commandment: "Thou
shalt commit Adultry".

Across the street at the book & gift store
they had copies of some of the old Bibles,
back then about $2 a page. I bought
a page with the Gothic Print cause I thought
my young adult Daughter might like it.

I thought i might like a reprit of a whole
Bible if any (but surely not at $2 a page)
I used one of the on-line search engines
available back then. I found out the
phrase KJV_1611 was on a few dozen web
pages (this morning on Goggle KJV 1611
gets over 2900 hits) But none of them actually
used the KJV1611 at all, many ignored
that the version they used is NOT the
KJV1611 at all but the KJV1769. Yes
I had stepped right into the KJVO movement
on-line. An innocent Lion in a whole
Den of Daniels

So it was later before i acutally found
a copy of a reprint KJV1611.

 

[Baptist in Richmond]

Originally posted by paidagogos:
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.

This is patently obvious: the reason for being anti-KJVO is due to the fact that there is NO SCRIPTURAL SUPPORT for such a belief.
In other words, one cannot justify the complete rejection of all other English translations of God's Holy Word. This is precisely the same reason that I do not believe in Purgatory.

 

[Baptist in Richmond]

Originally posted by Ed Edwards:
I understand that Jerry Falwell was a
successful IFB. So the IFB booted him out
of their organization. Now Jerry Falwell
has more people in his church than
½ the IFBs in the country

An IFB organization?
Wouldn't that be an oxymoron??

I hope that all is well with you and your wonderful family, Ed. May God deluge you with His Blessings.

 

[Baptist in Richmond]

Originally posted by Archangel7:
With tongue planted firmly in cheek&gt; Didn't the KJVO movement begin when King James I doubted the "pure, perfect, preserved word of God in English" -- the 1560 Geneva Bible? "Yea, hath God in deede said..."

Take thy tongue out of cheek.

The 1560 Geneva Bible IS the Word of God. Actually, I have a copy of the 1599 Geneva Bible [sans Apocrypha ] and the 1557 Geneva Bible (New Testament only).

My TRUE 1611 Authorised Version is also the Word of God.
Additionally, so is my copy of the Septuagint,
as is my copy of the Wiclif Bible,
and my Tyndale Bible,
and my Cranmer New Testament,
and my Dead Sea Scrolls Bible
as well as my New King James Version.

If I had not given my 1769 Revision to my church, it too would be the Word of God. It still is the Word of God, I simply do not have a copy.

Hope this post finds you well.

 

[Ed Edwards]

Amen Brother Baptist in Richmond -- Preach it!

 

[robycop3]

Skanwmatos:Why do you continue to ignore the facts of history? Why do you ignore the work of Broadus, Hovey, and Weston,....

Skan, how many times do I hafta repeat,"theMODERNKJVO monster"? Shoot, there were "Geneva Bible Onlyists" in the early 1600s, and an occasional book or article from then until the 1800s. But what we're discussing here is the Onlyism myth as it's advocated NOW. You know as well as I do that the current fad is much-different from the little sewing-circle type stuff of the 1800s, mainly because there weren't too many other English BVs to attack back then.

 

[Jim Ward]

That big ole work day over so soon Cranston? Seems like not as many hours were worked as claimed if you are here so soon. In fact you mentioned something about working over 12 hours in a post, and it hasn't been 12 hours since your last post from last night.

When oh when does truth start coming forth from you?

 

[Ed Edwards]

Originally posted by Jim Ward:
That big ole work day over so soon Cranston? Seems like not as many hours were word=ked as claimed if you are here so soon. In fact you mentioned something about working over 12 hours in a post, and it hasn't been 12 hours since your last post from last night.

When oh when does truth start coming forth from you?

The JOKE IS ON YOU Brother
Jim Ward. He clearly said that it would
start at 3PM Saturday afternoon and extend
until 7AM Sunday morning.

Some KJVOs don't read the Bible
but have it read to them.
/ed has a thought about a new charitable
enterprise/