Southern Fried Baptist
Member
Why are y’all that don’t like old Kjv so mad at those that prefer it? Actually attack those that use it like their stupid for doing so.
-
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!
KJV hate
- Thread starter Southern Fried Baptist
- Start date
- Status
You have 100% totally missed it. There is no KJV hate. It is the idolitry of KJVonlyism that is opposed. Ask yourself what is wrong with onlyism. That is telling lies about other versions, pretending the KJV is the only legitimate Bible, despite the fact that the KJV was made from earlier multiple legitimate Bibles. The list goes on and on.
thomas15
Well-Known Member
I have been in regular attendance in a KJVO church for over 8 months. I'm not a member but support it as if I were a member. Every Sunday I take a KJV Bible and I don't say a word about it either way. They are KJVO and it's their call.
My personal feeling on the matter is the theory behind the KJVO movement is flawed. Last Sunday I was ambushed by a man I don't even know, he, for no apparent reason, made sure I knew he was KJVO and that the NIV is not a real Bible. He had no way of knowing my thoughts on this because I haven't said anything to anyone one way or the other and I had a KJV Bible right there in my hand.
This individual seemed to know nothing about the fact that the KJV we have today is basically the 1769 Benjamin Blayney revision much changed from the actual 1611 version. He told me the KJV is not in copyright and the NIV is as if that was a bad thing. I said to him I wouldn't go to the wall on that because the KJV is copyrighted in the UK which he seemed to know nothing about.
This is just an example of thinking regarding this issue. I have no problem with the KJV. I have many KJV Bibles in my collection. I like the KJV and use the KJV and if a church I attend or join uses a KJV that is fine with me.
But the claims the KJVO movement makes about the translation and the misinformation they spread about the modern translations is a problem. The insults and irrational proof given to support the movement is just plain weird. There are a lot of saved people using other than KJV Bibles and plenty of unsaved people reading KJV Bibles. I think they would be better served by (A) growing up and (B) just use the KJV and leave it at that.
My personal feeling on the matter is the theory behind the KJVO movement is flawed. Last Sunday I was ambushed by a man I don't even know, he, for no apparent reason, made sure I knew he was KJVO and that the NIV is not a real Bible. He had no way of knowing my thoughts on this because I haven't said anything to anyone one way or the other and I had a KJV Bible right there in my hand.
This individual seemed to know nothing about the fact that the KJV we have today is basically the 1769 Benjamin Blayney revision much changed from the actual 1611 version. He told me the KJV is not in copyright and the NIV is as if that was a bad thing. I said to him I wouldn't go to the wall on that because the KJV is copyrighted in the UK which he seemed to know nothing about.
This is just an example of thinking regarding this issue. I have no problem with the KJV. I have many KJV Bibles in my collection. I like the KJV and use the KJV and if a church I attend or join uses a KJV that is fine with me.
But the claims the KJVO movement makes about the translation and the misinformation they spread about the modern translations is a problem. The insults and irrational proof given to support the movement is just plain weird. There are a lot of saved people using other than KJV Bibles and plenty of unsaved people reading KJV Bibles. I think they would be better served by (A) growing up and (B) just use the KJV and leave it at that.
Last edited:
Can you tell us who gets mad at those who prefer the KJV
And who has attacked someone who uses the KJV?
One other thing -
I see you stated "so mad at those that prefer it"
or are you talking about KJO? -
Preference for the KJV is not being attacked. I have read the KJV over 50 years. It is a modern, man-made KJV-only theory that makes claims for the KJV that are not true that is rejected and condemned as being non-scriptural and wrong.
It is not being stupid to reject believing assertions for the KJV that are not true. It would be being deceived to believe assertions for the KJV that are not true.
Last edited:
I've been here at the Baptist Board since 2002 and I've never seen a member who hates the King James Bible or who attacks those who prefer it.
I've seen people combat Onlyism, but that's totally different.
TheOldJudge
Member
Not to inject myself into a conversation in which I do not belong, but I have received hate (not merely disagreement or alternative preferences) from both saved and unsaved individuals for my use of the 1611 King James Version. (Yes, I know all about the 1769 revision, as well as the 1629, 1638, and 1873 revisions/reformatting. There is a man in my church who publishes and sells high-quality KJV Bibles using only the 1611 text.)
Local Christians in my area from other congregations have scorned our church and its members for using "that old, dumb version" for years. I have talked to multiple individuals through the years when going doorknocking that expressed dislike for our church. Their reason? We use "that relic" or "the old version" that they "do not like." It didn't matter that our church was friendly, had numerous ministries, and was known for its community service and outreach to children and the underprivileged. All that mattered to some was that I and my fellow congregants used the King James Version as our preferred translation of Scripture.
Surprisingly, the unsaved have been even more vitriolic against the King James than the Christians that use modern translations. Just last month, I was confronted by two women of an irreligious status who wanted to know if I "used that King James Bible." My affirmative answer was all it took to elicit a response: "That Bible is terrible! How can you use it? It is just man's opinions. The KJV condemns homosexuality, drunkenness, and talks about men as evil by nature! Obviously it would be just man's opinions; hateful men, at that. God is all love. Look at the other versions. They don't say those things!!!"
'Twas a fun conversation.
Sounds like more- to me - that they do not like a book that tells them they are sinners
and using the KJV is just more convenient.
It was probably the "onlyism" they reacted to. In your case, even "onlyism" has brought harm to the KJV.
And I hope you pointed out modern versions condemn homosexuality as well.
I prefer KJV myself. If you read enough old threads on here you will see that there is not a problem with KJV. The problem is the KJV only mentality. If you are not KJV only, then you won't get any criticism here. If you are KJV only, you better bring your best game to the debate because you will need it.
Psychological transference here. You want to attack those who are not KJVO or KJV-preferred, so you accuse them--us-- of attack on you. It won't wash.
thomas15
Well-Known Member
None of us know the hearts and minds of others. My guess is that those who don't care for your church don't care for a Biblical Christian faith plain and simple. It doesn't matter if someone is a church member, there are a lot, in fact most churches today are not made up of those who are born again. I think you should already know this.
So instead of saying that they don't believe the fundamentals of the the faith they say that the practices of those who do believe the fundamentals are flawed in some way. By insisting on using one particular translation of the Bible and making the claim that it is the only accurate translation gives these people a good excuse to mock without actually being critical of the historic Jesus or the historic concept of the Scriptures. I doubt that it is any more complicated then that.
I'm not saying that all of the modern translations are good. But those in general circulation point out all of the sins of man same as the KJV.
You might find it interesting to know that for over 50 years the Jehovah's Witnesses used the KJV and look at what they believe. Even today the official translation Old and New Testaments of the Mormons is the KJV and they get it wrong. Lesson here, it isn't in the translation as much as it is in the believing.
TheOldJudge
Member
Yes, Sir. I know these things. My church is very open about the use of the King James Version by, shall we say, "deviant" sects. We understand this, and many of the congregation who are active in outreach will recommend (or at least not oppose) the use of other translations when studying the Bible for new believers or "infants in the Faith" whom they are discipling. Although there are a few KJVO in our midst (and one of our former pastors personally held the KJV in such high esteem that it made Peter Ruckman's position look moderate), we will say that we are "only King James" as an institutional standard based on congregational preference rather than "King James only" as a pseudo-doctrine.
My examples regarding believers and non-believers in my community was simply to point out that there are people---lost and saved---who legitimately hate the KJV and those who use it. The original poster is not simply blathering fanciful ideas from a deluded mind. It is real, however uncommon.
I disagree that there is no KJV hate. Yes, some of what is seen as KJV hate is strong opposition to the KJV-only position. If you assert that you do not hate the KJV, that is one thing. If you assert it does not exist, that is quite another. Hate may be too strong a word in many cases, but I have noticed over the course of nearly 40 years in the ministry that there exists distinct dislike of the King James Version of the Bible. Not only is there opposition to KJV-only, there also is opposition to using the King James Version. Some are content to use what they use and leave the use of the KJV to those who like it. Others attack the use of the King James Version.
Nearly 40 years ago I was looking at a book in a Christian book store in Longview. As I thumbed through it, my eye caught a place where the author discussed the King James translation as one of the worst translations ever. KJVO was not in view, the attack was on the translation itself. 8 or 10 years ago a writer at SBC Voices attacked the “Old Paths” in general, and then used KJV as a “great example” of what was wrong with the old paths. While he brought up KJVO in this piece, his points were not against “onlyism,” but against the King James translation. He did not believe there was any reason that anyone should use the KJV in Bible study or in preaching. The language was too formal, too old, too confusing, out-of-date (as far as new discoveries, etc.), and modern translations are superior “in every way”. He said King James English was becoming a foreign language (the current one, not 1611). Some commenter chimed in with a derogatory joke about the language, of ordering at a restaurant thou’s best burgereths, and a Coketh (or something like that).
Now you all may agree with all of that about the KJV; but you also need the discernment to see that is not merely an attack on onlyism, it is opposition the Bible itself. I am gladly willing to call it strong opposition (no need to call it hate except when the mockery creeps in) that reflects what you believe about the Bible, but be willing to own when your opposition is to the Bible itself and do not blame that part on the KJVOs.
Nearly 40 years ago I was looking at a book in a Christian book store in Longview. As I thumbed through it, my eye caught a place where the author discussed the King James translation as one of the worst translations ever. KJVO was not in view, the attack was on the translation itself. 8 or 10 years ago a writer at SBC Voices attacked the “Old Paths” in general, and then used KJV as a “great example” of what was wrong with the old paths. While he brought up KJVO in this piece, his points were not against “onlyism,” but against the King James translation. He did not believe there was any reason that anyone should use the KJV in Bible study or in preaching. The language was too formal, too old, too confusing, out-of-date (as far as new discoveries, etc.), and modern translations are superior “in every way”. He said King James English was becoming a foreign language (the current one, not 1611). Some commenter chimed in with a derogatory joke about the language, of ordering at a restaurant thou’s best burgereths, and a Coketh (or something like that).
Now you all may agree with all of that about the KJV; but you also need the discernment to see that is not merely an attack on onlyism, it is opposition the Bible itself. I am gladly willing to call it strong opposition (no need to call it hate except when the mockery creeps in) that reflects what you believe about the Bible, but be willing to own when your opposition is to the Bible itself and do not blame that part on the KJVOs.
Last edited:
thomas15
Well-Known Member
You would have a fantastic point in all of this if somehow you could show that the Bible teaches that the KJV is the only legitimate translation of the Bible, that from the time of the first man Adam until AD1611 the KJV actually existed, that the only language Jehovah approves of and wants us to use is Early Modern English, that the Apostles of Jesus spoke english, could you explain how Erasmus actually produce the TR manuscripts when he didn't have a complete greek NT, explain to us why those who hold the KJV in such high esteem don't insist that all public, private and home schools insist that those schools teach their kids Early Modern English, why KJVO writers today don't write and speak in Early Modern English. I could go on and on...
You would also have a fantastic point in all of this if the world didn't hate all of us including those of us who hold the fundamentals of the Christian faith and practice in high regard and don't espouse KJVO. There is a lot of dislike of us even if we are not vocal in the choice of our Bible translations.
When I was 18 years old Jehovah put this desire in me to learn His ways. In my lack of knowledge I decided to buy myself a Bible. My reasoning was if I want to find out about God probably a good place to start is with the Bible. So I went to a Christian bookstore to get one. I had no idea that there were different translations and reference Bibles or study Bibles I thought a Bible was a Bible. I walk into this store and the lady there asked me if she could help me I said I wanted to buy a Bible. She replied "a King James Bible"? Not knowing anything about the matter and being shy and nervous I said "OK".
I take my new King James Bible home and start reading. I struggled but kept at it. After about a month one of my friends (I was in college at the time) invited me to a Bible Study. He and a lot of the kids in the study seemed to know a lot about the Bible. This was year 1977, I was surprised at how seriously they took the words, they spent about an hour discussing the fine points of a passage of about 6 verses but because I had a KJV it was a difficult time for me. Within a few days maybe a week I bought a $2.99 paperback edition of the Living Bible and a month later I accepted Jesus as my Savior, with a copy of the Living Bible paraphrase! I studied that particular Bible, taped the cover on and still I used it so much that I finally replaced it because it looked so bad.
Two things-
1) Been nearly 24 hours since Southern Fired Baptists has reposted ----- Hmmmm just saying
2) Some have given examples of the hate of (supposed) KJV haters.
IMHO - the OP was concerned (or complaining) about the (supposed) KJV haters who are members of this board.
1) Been nearly 24 hours since Southern Fired Baptists has reposted ----- Hmmmm just saying
2) Some have given examples of the hate of (supposed) KJV haters.
IMHO - the OP was concerned (or complaining) about the (supposed) KJV haters who are members of this board.
Prove your accusation. From what I read it's the other way around. Anyone who uses is is labeled KJV only wether they are or aren't.
MB
You have a point. I have seen professing Christians express hate for God's Word if the version not their preference.
To be fair, I have not seen people hate the KJV on this forum, but the world is much larger than the BB.
I have seen some on this forum hate God's Word if it is not the KJV (not just say they prefer the KJV, or that they believe the KJV the best-most accurate translation, but to outright despise the Word of God if it is of a different translation than they prefer).
Thankfully we have, to my knowledge, no member here who hates the KJV and very few KJV-prefered that hate God's Word if not their preferred translation.
.
TheOldJudge
Member
My points were not meant to be "fantastic," Sir; rather, they were simply my heartfelt and sincere analysis of the topic at hand.
Please do not assume an aggressive posture when responding to a fellow believer in recreation and mutually beneficial conversation. There is no need for hositility. We are all brothers and sisters in Christ on this forum, and I am happy as a lark to be here.
I prefer to use the King James Version. You like the Living Bible. God loves us both. Translations, revisions, and paraphrases do not exalt one child of God above another in the eyes of our Saviour. May we both be strengthened by His power to advance His kingdom until He comes. Amen!
- Status