King James Onlyism and Missions

[37818]

he first epistle to the gentiles was Galatians, written in 49 AD by Paul.

Some have that understanding. Others give differnent order of writing.

 

[AVL1984]

(bold my emphasis)

I think you are confusing having a book* called the Bible - with the message of the Bible.
A simple 1 or 2 page evangelistic track can help someone lead a person to the Lord. Many have come to the Lord thur listening to the Gospel on the Radio or TV!

Not at all. I may not have worded it as correctly as you, but the meaning should have been clear. At any rate, it still takes the preaching of the cross, whether verbal, written or otherwise, for a person to be saved.

And if you want to get very specific - the Bible tells us we must have a preacher! Would you agree a preacher is necessary? Lets take a look at Rom 10:14 "and how shall they hear without a preacher"? So according to the Bible, there must be a preacher!

The "preacher" could be a tract, literal preaching, or just a Bible study. Why become a nitpick, Salty. Been at sea too long?

How some "Christians" can have such and make such "off-the-wall" statements as a preacher isn't necessary seems heretical to me. Maybe they're preaching and teaching a different Jesus.


* YES, I realize technically it is 66 books!

 

[JD731]

@JD731

Here are some excellent missions histories for you (or anyone else) to educate yourself about the big wide world of Christians before the English language existed, and outside of the English speaking world after the English language developed:

Encountering the History of Missions, by John Mark Terry and Robert L. Gallagher. This is a very new book (2017). I'm reading it now as the probable textbook for a new course we are developing, "History of Missiology." So far it's really good.

History of Christianity in Asia, 2 vol., by Samuel Hugh Moffett. This is an incredible account. I learned so much about Syrian and Persian Christianity and the awesome missionaries they sent out in the early centuries. Hmm. Maybe the Peshitta is the true perfect preserved Word of God.

The Light in Dark Ages, by V. Raymond Edman. A true classic, hard to get ahold of nowadays. Edman was evangelical and evangelistic, president of Wheaton College when my parents were there in the 1940's.

A History of Christian Missions, by Stephen Neill. Excellent!

A Concise History of the Christian World Mission, rev., by J. Herbert Kane, a leading missiologist of the 20th century. An excellent work for the KJVO believer who wants to cautiously get started.

From Jerusalem to Irian Jaya, 2nd ed., by Ruth A. Tucker. This biographical history is a standard textbook for the history of missions nowadays. A fascinating read!

Also, a couple of reference books that discuss many historical missionaries, most of whom never heard of the KJV:

Who Was Who in Church History, rev., by Elgin S. Moyer. This is a fascinating book. I consult it over and over.

Evangelical Dictionary of World Missions, ed. by A. Scott Moreau. This is an incredible book, a must have for anyone interested in the history of missions.

I have no problem with a perfect Bible before the KJV, but I do have a problem with one hundred of them in the same language in a span of one hundred and fifty years. It makes God appear as an imbecile or totally detached from the world he wants to save.

Are you making the case that people who have not read these books cannot intelligently comment on the scriptures? Are you making the case that reading these books makes a person more spiritual? What does a people or a nation need first, a Bible written in their own language or a preacher preaching in their language in your view? Is there a biblical precedent?

 

[37818]

I have no problem with a perfect Bible before the KJV, . . .

Which one would it have been?

 

[JD731]

Can we get this arrogant blasphemous trash off of this forum? I mean really.

Says a man who thinks it is something that elevates his stature in the eyes of God to be elected by him to be ungodly.

6 For when we were yet without strength, in due time Christ died for the ungodly.

So yes, we want to hear what you have to say, for sure.

 

[JonC]

I have no problem with a perfect Bible before the KJV, but I do have a problem with one hundred of them in the same language in a span of one hundred and fifty years.

I also think we have an overabundance of translations. While the KJV may not be a suitable translation today, translations seem to be springing up everywhere.

Do you believe, then, that the KJV was an unnecessary addition to translations in the English language...that they should have been satisfied with the Tyndale (Myles Coverdale) Bible even though it wasn't exactly Anglican?

That's how some of our translations seem to come about today (denominations want an official Bible for their denomination).

 

[Reformed1689]

. It makes God appear as an imbecile or totally detached from the world he wants to save.

No, that is what your position makes you look like.

 

[JD731]

I also think we have an overabundance of translations. While the KJV may not be a suitable translation today, translations seem to be springing up everywhere.

Do you believe, then, that the KJV was an unnecessary addition to translations in the English language...that they should have been satisfied with the Tyndale (Myles Coverdale) Bible even though it wasn't exactly Anglican?

That's how some of our translations seem to come about today (denominations want an official Bible for their denomination).

No, we have a history with the KJV. America was discovered and a migration from mostly Europe, the west, began. We speak English over here.It is just a biblical fact that God moves west. He had to get his missionaries and other preachers out of countries where they have state churches and establish a place where the government could not control his church. America is that place.

God curses those regimes that attempt to mix religion and the government. Did you know Saul lost his dynasty for this very reason? He, the king, entered into the priest office and offered sacrifices.

 

[JonC]

No, we have a history with the KJV. America was discovered and a migration from mostly Europe, the west, began. We speak English over here.It is just a biblical fact that God moves west. He had to get his missionaries and other preachers out of countries where they have state churches and establish a place where the government could not control his church. America is that place.

God curses those regimes that attempt to mix religion and the government. Did you know Saul lost his dynasty for this very reason? He, the king, entered into the priest office and offered sacrifices.

This does not make sence. Not only was the KJV not the first English translation, but (as I'm sure you know) it was also a direct product of the English government (as was the Church of England).

If God curses the product of Church and government then the KJV Bible is cursed (it, of course, isn't).

 

[JD731]

d took it from him and gave it to the house of David.

Now consider the very strange "ministry" of Gail Riplinger. Her website says, "A.V. Publications, Corp. is devoted to giving glory to the word of God, which he has magnified above his name (Ps. 138:2) and to "the great God and our Saviour Jesus Christ" (Titus 2:13). (AV Publications Shopping Cart)

That's a great illustration of my point. She wants to glorify the Bible, but the Bible never says to do that. It is God who has magnified His Word above His name (Psalm 128:2). We are not supposed to do that. To be zealous for the KJV means you are exalting the Bible, not the Giver of it.

Back to Riplinger. I could say a lot about her (and have), but my main point here is that because she writes so much defending the KJV (which needs no defense, since it is God's powerful Word; don't defend it, fight with it), she does almost nothing to obey the Great Commission.

Note that all of her books are about the KJV, and none about reaching the world for Christ (hopefully a complete list; I am not including DVDs, CDs, etc., but only books):

Blind Guides ($16.95)
Hazardous Materials ($24.95)
In Awe of Thy Word ($39.95)
New Age Bible Versions, 1993 ($14.95)
The Dictionary Inside the King James Bible ($11.97)
The Hidden History of the English Scriptures ($12.95)
The Language of the King James Bible ($19.95)
The Only Authorized Picture of Christ, with Gayle Russ ($19.95)
Which Bible Is God's Word? ($19.95)

Her website lists five tracts on the KJV issues, and YES! one Gospel tract, "Find Mayberry's Love, Joy, and Peace," based on the TV show, "Andy Griffith." I've not read it, so I don't know if it is a good presentation of the Gospel. But at least she does something. However, there is nothing about reaching the world for Christ on the whole website, unless you count her selling the "Spanish New Testament (1602 Purified)."

So, the point here again is not that Riplinger does nothing to obey the Great Commission, but that her full on defense of the KJV distracts from Great Commission fulfillment. You can either be strong on the Great Commission, or you can be strong on defending the KJV. You can't do both.

And again I'll say it: there is no command in the whole Bible to defend the Bible.

P. S. Don't know what she does with all that money from her books, but John R. Rice poured every bit of the profit from his 200 or more books into his ministry, saying, "Millions of dollars have passed through these hands, but praise God, none of it stuck!" My son is following his example, and sends all of the money from his books to missionaries. (He wrote the research commentaries for Logos on 1 & 2 Peter and Jude, and a couple of other books.)

You know, your posting style and manner of posting, which I will call, "stirring the pot," reminds me of a proverb in the book of wisdom, which says the following;

Proverbs 30:33
Surely the churning of milk bringeth forth butter, and the wringing of the nose bringeth forth blood: so the forcing of wrath bringeth forth strife.

To put every person, such as myself, who believes that God can give a perfect testimony of himself in any language he chooses, And to believe that men, no matter how worldly, does not have the capacity to translate the spiritual content of his infinite mind using words of their own choosing, even to the point of paraphrasing him, into the Ruckman/Riplinger mindset is dishonest. This is especially true when I have specifically said that women preachers are outside their functional purpose in the body of Christ. I am not interested in the theology of women. It is on display all around us now and it is causing massive confusion. Thank you NIV.

To deal with one point of your comments above.

That's a great illustration of my point. She wants to glorify the Bible, but the Bible never says to do that. It is God who has magnified His Word above His name (Psalm 128:2). We are not supposed to do that. To be zealous for the KJV means you are exalting the Bible, not the Giver of it.

The sad thing here is, Riplinger probably knows the scripture better than you. The scripture indeed does have Christians glorifying it, if you will accept that the "word of the Lord" was written after he spoke it.

2 Thessalonians 3:1
Finally, brethren, pray for us, that the word of the Lord may have free course, and be glorified, even as it is with you:

This reminds me when you boldly rebuked her in another thread for suggesting that the word of God was being corrupted. You responded that the word of God cannot be corrupted. I knew then that you were not familiar with the following quote, but I said nothing because I am not here to defend Riplinger. However, one does learn things by a persons words.

2 Corinthians 2:17
For we are not as many, which corrupt the word of God: but as of sincerity, but as of God, in the sight of God speak we in Christ.

It just goes to show you that spending all of this time reading all these books you post has the potential of making one 1/2 mile wide and 1/4 inch deep in the true doctrines of the faith. Just saying!

 

[John of Japan]

I have no problem with a perfect Bible before the KJV, but I do have a problem with one hundred of them in the same language in a span of one hundred and fifty years. It makes God appear as an imbecile or totally detached from the world he wants to save.

Sorry, this paragraph has nothing to do with what I have written.

Are you making the case that people who have not read these books cannot intelligently comment on the scriptures? Are you making the case that reading these books makes a person more spiritual? What does a people or a nation need first, a Bible written in their own language or a preacher preaching in their language in your view? Is there a biblical precedent?

I was very clear about why I posted those book titles. I said: "Here are some excellent missions histories for you (or anyone else) to educate yourself about the big wide world of Christians before the English language existed, and outside of the English speaking world after the English language developed."

I was referring to what you said in post #36, which was,

This is the end of the church age, not the beginning. God has not failed. If the Japanese needed a perfect Bible he would have given them one long before now. In all of the names you fellows believe to be great missionaries, preachers, evangelists, etc, none of them had Japanese names. What kind of names did they have? Well, they had English names. Why is that? Because the English speakers were given the word by God and they believed it. Believing it means they will preach it to others. We did not just get lucky. It was not circumstance and how the ole ball bounced.

I was trying to help you understand that English and English-speaking peoples are not all there are. All of the books I mentioned are helpful in educating one about the history of missions, and the many, many great missionaries who were not English speaking down through the ages.

By the way, I'm curious. What do you mean by "the names you fellows believe to be great missionaries"? Don't you believe them to be great missionaries, men like Livingstone, Carey, Judson?

 

[John of Japan]

To put every person, such as myself, who believes that God can give a perfect testimony of himself in any language he chooses, And to believe that men, no matter how worldly, does not have the capacity to translate the spiritual content of his infinite mind using words of their own choosing, even to the point of paraphrasing him, into the Ruckman/Riplinger mindset is dishonest. This is especially true when I have specifically said that women preachers are outside their functional purpose in the body of Christ. I am not interested in the theology of women. It is on display all around us now and it is causing massive confusion. Thank you NIV.

You just never quit denigrating me, do you? So far I have not thought of you to be in the Ruckman/Riplinger mindset, but this post sends me in that direction.

To deal with one point of your comments above.

The sad thing here is, Riplinger probably knows the scripture better than you. The scripture indeed does have Christians glorifying it, if you will accept that the "word of the Lord" was written after he spoke it.

2 Thessalonians 3:1
Finally, brethren, pray for us, that the word of the Lord may have free course, and be glorified, even as it is with you:

To pray that the word of the Lord be glorified is a passive statement in both Greek and the KJV. Paul did not say "glorify the Word of the Lord," but "Pray that the Word of the Lord be glorified," meaning that Someone else, namely the Lord. will glorify it. This is basic KJV grammar.

This reminds me when you boldly rebuked her in another thread for suggesting that the word of God was being corrupted. You responded that the word of God cannot be corrupted. I knew then that you were not familiar with the following quote, but I said nothing because I am not here to defend Riplinger. However, one does learn things by a persons words.

2 Corinthians 2:17
For we are not as many, which corrupt the word of God: but as of sincerity, but as of God, in the sight of God speak we in Christ.

So many times KJVO folk do not understand their own KJV, and this is one of those times. In 1611, the term "corrupt" meant "dilute," and that is an accurate rendering of the Greek word in this passage, kapeleuo (καπηλεύω). That word occurs only here in the Greek NT, and is not the normal word for "corrupt" in the Bible, which means to make putrid.

The back story is that crooked wine merchants would dilute their product, then sell it as the pure thing. This is the verse that led us to write in the intro to our Japanese NT, 金銭的利益の為の出版も、厳禁します。(Permission is not granted to profit monetarily from this translation.)

So, is the Bible incorruptible? It says it is: "Being born again, not of corruptible seed, but of incorruptible, by the word of God, which liveth and abideth for ever" (1 Peter 1:23).

It just goes to show you that spending all of this time reading all these books you post has the potential of making one 1/2 mile wide and 1/4 inch deep in the true doctrines of the faith. Just saying!

Yep, denigrating me again. Must be your hobby, you spend so much time at it.

 

[JD731]

Sorry, this paragraph has nothing to do with what I have written.


I was very clear about why I posted those book titles. I said: "Here are some excellent missions histories for you (or anyone else) to educate yourself about the big wide world of Christians before the English language existed, and outside of the English speaking world after the English language developed."

I was referring to what you said in post #36, which was,

I was trying to help you understand that English and English-speaking peoples are not all there are. All of the books I mentioned are helpful in educating one about the history of missions, and the many, many great missionaries who were not English speaking down through the ages.

By the way, I'm curious. What do you mean by "the names you fellows believe to be great missionaries"? Don't you believe them to be great missionaries, men like Livingstone, Carey, Judson?

By the way, I'm curious. What do you mean by "the names you fellows believe to be great missionaries"? Don't you believe them to be great missionaries, men like Livingstone, Carey, Judson?

The context was what you fellows believe, not what I believe. The point was that in the group of these great men who have exercised their callings so well that they became an example for others, no Japanese names ever come up. These are English names, or at the least names of men from western nations.

I would never speak evil of Baptist missionaries, unless they were the kind that will not give an invitation to come and be saved. There are some of them.

 

[Logos1560]

I have no problem with a perfect Bible before the KJV, but I do have a problem with one hundred of them in the same language in a span of one hundred and fifty years.

The strawman of one hundred English Bibles widely distributed or regularly read has already been pointed out. Probably only a dozen or less of them are widely distributed or regularly read. There was around that many in print when yet another English Bible translation was made in 1611.

If a perfect English Bible translation had been made before 1611, the Church of England makers of the KJV changed or corrupted it.

 

[JD731]

The strawman of one hundred English Bibles widely distributed or regularly read has already been pointed out. Probably only a dozen or less of them are widely distributed or regularly read.

If a perfect English Bible translation had been made before 1611, the Church of England makers of the KJV changed or corrupted it.

There was around that many in print when yet another English Bible translation was made in 1611.

Those translations are still around. They are just as effective as they ever were. The nations who produced them are more in darkness now than when they were produced. I think there is something to learn here.

 

[AVL1984]

Those translations are still around. They are just as effective as they ever were. The nations who produced them are more in darkness now than when they were produced. I think there is something to learn here.

This isn't the fault of the translations. It's the sinfulness of man's heart that makes them fall into "more darkness" than when those translations were produced. Straw man argument on your part.

 

[JD731]

This isn't the fault of the translations. It's the sinfulness of man's heart that makes them fall into "more darkness" than when those translations were produced. Straw man argument on your part.

Well, I think you are right. So we can thank God he took his bible, which is light, farther West, where it could shine on some who would see. He left the others over there where they still are now. Everything was good until, in 1901, their philosophy was shipped over here and things have gone down hill since. Nothing like a little darkness to beget more darkness. Paul said, a little leaven leaventh the whole lump. We are not heading towards victory because of these new bibles, we are heading towards destruction.

Jesus asks the rhetorical question, when I come again will I find faith on the earth. Societies do not get better, they get worse and we have Noah as an example. Only eight people survived that judgement. Hopefully we will do a little better than that in the next round but I have read the text. Few there be that find the straight gate, Jesus said. I believe him.

 

[JD731]

This does not make sence. Not only was the KJV not the first English translation, but (as I'm sure you know) it was also a direct product of the English government (as was the Church of England).

If God curses the product of Church and government then the KJV Bible is cursed (it, of course, isn't).

Are you saying the King of England made the KJV mandatory for the church? Do you know what it means to combine church and state?

The Church of England was Catholicism redefined without the Pope. That is all it was.

 

[AVL1984]

Well, I think you are right. So we can thank God he took his bible, which is light, farther West, where it could shine on some who would see. He left the others over there where they still are now. Everything was good until, in 1901, their philosophy was shipped over here and things have gone down hill since. Nothing like a little darkness to beget more darkness. Paul said, a little leaven leaventh the whole lump. We are not heading towards victory because of these new bibles, we are heading towards destruction.

Hogwash! God can use all translations. He can use anything he chooses. Don't limit him with your finite mind.

Jesus asks the rhetorical question, when I come again will I find faith on the earth.

Where is this? I may have read it and not taken it as you've interpreted it....Reference, please. Honest request. Thanks.

Societies do not get better, they get worse and we have Noah as an example. Only eight people survived that judgement. Hopefully we will do a little better than that in the next round but I have read the text. Few there be that find the straight gate, Jesus said. I believe him.

Sincerely doubt that this is because of the translations. In all of them there is the verse that states that the "gates of hell" would not prevail against the church.

 

[AVL1984]

Are you saying the King of England made the KJV mandatory for the church? Do you know what it means to combine church and state?

The Church of England was Catholicism redefined without the Pope. That is all it was.

And?