• 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!

Is the KJVO Movement Dying?

Is the KJVO movement dying out?

  • Yes

    Votes: 11 50.0%
  • No

    Votes: 4 18.2%
  • Maybe

    Votes: 2 9.1%
  • I don't know

    Votes: 3 13.6%
  • I don't care!

    Votes: 2 9.1%

  • Total voters
    22
Status
Not open for further replies.

John of Japan

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
My vote is "yes." The movement is dying out. If it were not I would not have nearly as much confidence in my KJV Bible as I do. In this world all good things die out because of the leaven. I have read the prophesied condition of the church of Jesus Christ just before he returns. Paul addressed the attitudes in the pastoral epistles.
Here's my problem. Obviously the KJV is English, but only about 18% of the world speaks English, and for a very large percentage of that it is their second language, not their heart language. Like I tell people, there is no Japanese KJV because it is English and their language is Japanese.

On the other hand, Bible believing Christianity is alive and well in China, though persecuted. One of my Chinese college students is there right now for the summer, serving Christ. There is no such thing as a "Chinese KJV." But does somehow the authority of the KJV extend to China? Or, in your view is the authority of the KJV universal?


Jesus Christ in his prophetic dealing with one of the characteristics of this present age in Mt 13 was of the slow moving but ever spreading problem of the leaven. Another parable spake he unto them; The kingdom of heaven is like unto leaven, which a woman took, and hid in three measures of meal, till the whole was leavened, Jesus said. This was the 4th parable of the 7 in the chapter. Coincidentally (?) the 4th church of the 7th in Revelation 2 and 3 allowed Jezebel to teach the Christian faith.
Please prove exegetically that the leaven there refers to a Bible translation.


The KJ Bible was produced for the English speakers near the same time the Reformation took place. The KJV brought salvation to the West and the Reformed doctrines were the leaven that has choked out the truths. None of the Reformation doctrines are true even though they use the same vocabulary in their Bibles but the words have different meanings to their converts.
So Tyndale and his wonderful translation did not bring salvation to the West? And Wycliffe, the "morning star of the Reformation," did not bring salvation to the West with his wonderful translation?

Leaven is a dominating force today and few people are getting saved because there is nothing to believe that is really true. That is the way I see it. The Lord is coming for us soon for the few believers who are left.
Pretty negative and English-centric view. Are you aware at all of the revivals occurring around the world in languages other than English? Did you know that over 40% of Korea is now Christian?
 

Deacon

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
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
 

John of Japan

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
It is has become an emotional issue rather than a Biblical truths issue, which this it is being claimed to be. In the minds of the KJVonlyists it is believed to be the purely a Biblical truths issue.
I became a pro KJV advocate in 1968. But I never became a KJVonlyist. I used the NKJV for a while. And went back to the KJV for my personal use.
I agree with you about the emotionalism.

The problem is on both sides of the issue. I was a member of Faith Baptist Church of Canoga Park from 1970 to 1978. It was not yet KJVonlyist. But today it is.
Back in the day it seemed to be a wonderful revival centered church. Don't know what happened to it, but didn't Ray Batema resign at some point? Don't remember the issue.
 

37818

Well-Known Member
Back in the day it seemed to be a wonderful revival centered church. Don't know what happened to it, but didn't Ray Batema resign at some point? Don't remember the issue.
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.
 
Last edited:

John of Japan

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
I've heard from one who knows Waite well that Kirk DiVietro was named as head of the DBS several years ago. And almost all the current members are over 70.

I've never met or heard DiVietro, but he is the guy who wrote Cleaning Up Hazardous Materials (subtitle, A Refutation of Gail Riplinger's Hazardous Materials"). This, of course, is part of the civil war between the DBS and Riplinger. Opposing the nonsense of Riplinger and her opposition to useful original language material is, of course, a good thing, but I haven't read the book, so don't know if I could recommend it.

It's hard to learn much about DiVietro on the Internet. He has written a book beside this one, a short (85 pp.) refutation of the book by James White. It was published in 1995 by the DBS.

Chick Publications (which is pretty radical KJVO) does have an interview with him here: Chick.com: The Real Reason They Made the NKJV. In it he says he started a church in 1977, which would make him my generation. I'm 72, so old guys, both of us! :Thumbsup
 
Last edited:

John of Japan

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
Other KJV authors or leaders up in years: David Cloud (in college when I was), H. D. Williams, Riplinger herself (76). Like me, one foot in the grave and the other on a banana peel. :confused:

And Jack Chick died in 2016. Don't know who replaced him.
 

37818

Well-Known Member
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. . . ."
 

Logos1560

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
And Jack Chick died in 2016. Don't know who replaced him.

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.
 

JD731

Well-Known Member
Here's my problem. Obviously the KJV is English, but only about 18% of the world speaks English, and for a very large percentage of that it is their second language, not their heart language. Like I tell people, there is no Japanese KJV because it is English and their language is Japanese.

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.


On the other hand, Bible believing Christianity is alive and well in China, though persecuted. One of my Chinese college students is there right now for the summer, serving Christ. There is no such thing as a "Chinese KJV." But does somehow the authority of the KJV extend to China? Or, in your view is the authority of the KJV universal?

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.




Please prove exegetically that the leaven there refers to a Bible translation.

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

So Tyndale and his wonderful translation did not bring salvation to the West? And Wycliffe, the "morning star of the Reformation," did not bring salvation to the West with his wonderful translation?

Well did they?


Pretty negative and English-centric view. Are you aware at all of the revivals occurring around the world in languages other than English? Did you know that over 40% of Korea is now Christian?

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.
 

John of Japan

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
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.
All pretty much irrelevant to my points.
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.
You are completely wrong, according to the KJV. The Bible is absolutely for lost people. A person in any language cannot be saved without the Word of God, as the Bible clearly says in Romans 10:17: "So then faith cometh by hearing, and hearing by the word of God."

Again, 1 Peter 1:23 says plainly that it is through the Word of God that one is born again: "Being born again, not of corruptible seed, but of incorruptible, by the word of God, which liveth and abideth for ever."

Your radical position is an insult to such great ministries as Bearing Precious Seed (KJVO), which gets the Word of God out to the nations. They printed 86,000 of our Lifeline Japanese John and Romans, which have been distributed in Japan, but do you not believe someone can get saved through those Scriptures?

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.
Completely irrelevant to the subject at hand.

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.
What in the world is your point in regards to the KJV and the OP?

I did not say it did but I will say the leaven can and does include Bible translations and paraphrases.
Again I ask, prove this biblically.
Well did they?
Absolutely they did. Pre-KJV, there was a tremendous move of God through Wycliffe and Tyndale, with multitudes saved through their translations. For example, Wycliffe began enlisting Oxford graduates to “go out as evangelical preachers, proclaiming his views” (Elgin S. Moyer, Who Was Who in Church History, rev., 1968), p. 447), “proclaiming the Biblical doctrine of justification by faith in the crucified Savior” (Lars P. Qualben, A History of the Christian Church, rev., 1942, p. 193). These men were later called Lollards.

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.
You apparently know nothing of the incredible revivals that have occurred in Korea sans the KJV, which is English, starting in the early 20th century with men like R. A. Torrey and R. A. Hardie.
 

robycop3

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
One thing a movement absolutely must have is leadership, and I believe we are seeing the old leadership die off, with no coherent young leadership to take over.

First of all, Peter Ruckman kicked the bucket in 2016, and I'm not aware that a leader of similar abilities has taken over that ministry. The Bible Baptist Bookstore website still has the information about Ruckman's funeral (https://store.kjv1611.org/about-dr-ruckman/), so that page at least has not been updated in 8 years. My impression is that they are just running in place. Under "New Items" they have little more than a bunch of sermons for high prices. Say what you want about Ruckman, he was well educated and a strong personality. (Please note that I completely oppose his double inspiration doctrine, his name calling, etc..)

D. A. Waite, founder of the Dean Burgon Society, has had a bunch of defections in recent years, but still holds on to leadership. That website also has not been updated recently. They have no advertisements for their annual meeting in 2024, and the link for the 2023 meeting doesn't seem to work. Did it take place? On their "Blog" page (Dean Burgon Society) they still have the nasty response by H. D. Williams to my Amazon review of his book, but that whole brouhaha was many years ago, and H. D. Williams has not been with the DBS in years! Dr. Waite is in his 90's. Who will take over that ministry?

Old guys who left the DBS started the King James Bible Research Council (Home), but like I say, they are mostly old guys (like me!). What is the future of that organization? Has a capable leader showed up among them?

Let's not even talk about old Gail Riplinger and her weirdness. She's not really a leader. And the Waites damaged her reputation when they found out she was on her third hubby after being divorced twice!

So, is the KJVO movement going to die out eventually?
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.
 

John of Japan

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
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.
Good post.

Don't know Kizziah. I never considered Kinney to be a leader, per se, but anyway it's good that he is changing.

About Kinney, in March he was still advocating for an inerrant KJV
at 4.30".
 

Baptist4life

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
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" . :)
 

JD731

Well-Known Member
All pretty much irrelevant to my points.

You are completely wrong, according to the KJV. The Bible is absolutely for lost people. A person in any language cannot be saved without the Word of God, as the Bible clearly says in Romans 10:17: "So then faith cometh by hearing, and hearing by the word of God."

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, 1 Peter 1:23 says plainly that it is through the Word of God that one is born again: "Being born again, not of corruptible seed, but of incorruptible, by the word of God, which liveth and abideth for ever."

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.

Your radical position is an insult to such great ministries as Bearing Precious Seed (KJVO), which gets the Word of God out to the nations. They printed 86,000 of our Lifeline Japanese John and Romans, which have been distributed in Japan, but do you not believe someone can get saved through those Scriptures?

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.

but do you not believe someone can get saved through those Scriptures?

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.
 

John of Japan

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
As I understand it, the King James Bible Research Council (King James Bible Research Council) was founded by some who exited from the DBS. I can see from the doctrinal statement that they are KJVO in about the same way as the DBS: "We believe the King James Version preserves, by accurate translation, the inerrancy of the Greek Received Text and the Hebrew/Aramaic Masoretic text for English speaking people."

Their leadership (the "Council") is mostly old guys, as you can see from the photographs (Council). I've had a little bit of contact with David Sorenson (VP) and Phil Stringer, two of the main leaders. I've seen photos of the Bible collection of Dr. Brown, the Pres. Pretty impressive, actually!

There are several younger guys. I once listened to a message by one of them, and was not at all impressed. So the question is, which of the younger guys are capable enough to lead the KJVO movement?

There are other young me out there writing KJVO stuff. I know one of them, an impressive young evangelist. But his burden is not defending the KJV, though he has written a book about it. He is burdened to be the best evangelist he can be, so his passion is soul-winning. I think that is common among young fundamentalists nowadays, at least the ones I've run into.

We need to get back to the Great Commission. I tell my students, "Don't defend the Bible. It's a sword. Take it up and fight the Devil with it. Go out and stab someone with it!"
 

John of Japan

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
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.
What part of "word of God" escaped you? It occurs in 48 passages in the Word of God, the Bible. Almost every time it refers to the actual words of Almighty God, though it occasionally means the growth of the church in the book of Acts

Look at Mark 7:13, for example: "Making the word of God of none effect through your tradition, which ye have delivered: and many such like things do ye." Do you actually think Jesus was speaking of something other than the written Old Testament?

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.
I have never, ever set myself up as "the smartest man in the room," either on the BB or anywhere else. This is a lie, and you know it. I'm done with you if you are going to make this kind of vicious attack and lie about me. I will not answer any more of your posts, but will now put you on "Ignore."
 

John of Japan

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
BB friends, when JD731 said that I am the guy who "sets himself up as the smatest (sic) man in the room," he was attacking my Christian character, because that would be not just proud, but arrogant. I have never done that, nor will I, and I will not listen to attacks on my Christian character--and you should not put up with attacks on your character either!
 

JD731

Well-Known Member
Your radical position is an insult to such great ministries as Bearing Precious Seed (KJVO), which gets the Word of God out to the nations. They printed 86,000 of our Lifeline Japanese John and Romans, which have been distributed in Japan, but do you not believe someone can get saved through those Scriptures?


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.

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.
 

Logos1560

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
I have never, ever set myself up as "the smartest man in the room," either on the BB or anywhere else. This is a lie, and you know it. I'm done with you if you are going to make this kind of vicious attack and lie about me. I will not answer any more of your posts, but will now put you on "Ignore."


Are they "radical" and insulting because I disagree with him?

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".
 

Logos1560

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
I did not say it did but I will say the leaven can and does include Bible translations and paraphrases.

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.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top