"KJVO" Beginnings

[robycop3]

Upon reflection, I realize that fertile ground had been prepared for KJVO to hatch, with the making of the less-than-stellar RV. I'll hafta admit that if I had a choice between only the RV & the KJV, I'd take the KJV hands down.

However, KJVO was expanded to include EVERY newer version, with a few koox extending their dissing to older versions by inventing such codwallop as the "seven-Times-Purified" subdoctrine, which is pure garbage. It claims that God's word in English underwent seven "purifications" culminating in the KJV, & is based upon a complete misinterpretation of Psalm 12:6. The TRUE interpretation of this verse is that David, taking time out in his song about his own troubles to praise God, is COMPARING God's words to silver refined 7 times, which was the standard for silver Tabernacle implements, & was the purest physical substance known to David.

The originator of this trash is easy to locate...DR. LAWRENCE VANCE. Others such as Bill Bradley who have written boox advocating this hooey have copied from Vance.

I particularly detest this subdoctrine due to the nature of its origin...DISHONESTY, OR OUTRIGHT PREVARICATING, let alone its LACK OF TRUTH and its slamming of the older English BVs.! WHEN DID GOD EVER SAY ANYTHING IMPURE ? ? Dr. Vance's degrees are in ENGLISH, and there's no way he ACCIDENTALLY misinterpreted Psalm 12:6! I cannot reach any other conclusion that his little subdoctrine was conceived in DISHONESTY, & based upon pure conjecture and guesswork. It was just another gimmick to sell boox.

Anyone have any evidence of a general KJVO doctrine among the general public before 1930? Or, shall we conclude it originated from authors who copied from Wilkinson's book?

 

[Logos1560]

#1 - I believe that Bro John has the right insight on why there was no "KJVO" movement before 1880 = there was no need for it - the KJV was the dominant Bible used world-wide for the English-speaking people. /quote]

John Wesley's English N. T. was first printed in 1755. Wesley's Translation is said to have been popular in America. In 1808, there was Charles Thomson's English Bible: first English translation from the Septuagint for the O. T.. Charles Thomson was signer of the Declaration of Independence and secretary of the Continental Congress. In 1833, Noah Webster made a revision of the KJV. In 1842, Bible-believing scholars including several Baptists made a revision of the KJV that went through several editions. In 1850, Baptists Spencer Cone and William Wyckoff made a revision of the KJV's N. T. In 1866, the American Bible Union Version was printed. In 1851, James Murdock made an English translation of the Syraic N. T. Several of the pre-1611 English Bibles of which the KJV was a revision were reprinted in the mid-1800's.

During the 1800's, editions of the KJV with commentary or study notes were printed that pointed out claimed errors in the translating of the KJV.
Various standard Bible reference works including Bible dictionaries of that day did the same thing. If the KJV was considered perfect in the early 1800's, why did not the standard Bible reference works and commentaries produce a KJV-only view? Was that no need before 1880 or did Bible believers before that day already know that a KJV-only view was just as invalid as the earlier Latin Vulgate-only view had been?

 

[Mongol Servant]

KJVO Beginnings

Pastor Bob - once again - "right on the money"!
Mexdeaf - thanks for the comments on "treading lightly". I know what you mean, especially the Mexican dissention problems - I might know some of those involved.
Roby & Logos - thanks for the thoughts and info on the various American printings of N.T. & Bibles. I have a facsimile copy of the very first Bible authorized to be printed by the Congress of the United States of America under the direction of Mr Robert Aitkens in 1782. I shouldn't have to reiterate that it was the KJV.
Now, let's remember the #2 point in my post: if the MVs are not the product of an attempt to water-down/negate/invalidate the scripture, then, what would be a better way to do it? Remember 2 Cor.11:14-15 and all the gullible souls tricked into catholicism, JWs, Mormons, etc, by something that looks like it's of God.

 

[NaasPreacher (C4K)]

Now, let's remember the #2 point in my post: if the MVs are not the product of an attempt to water-down/negate/invalidate the scripture, then, what would be a better way to do it? Remember 2 Cor.11:14-15 and all the gullible souls tricked into catholicism, JWs, Mormons, etc, by something that looks like it's of God.

The topic of the thread is regarding the the beginnings of KJVO, not why the MV's are a reality. Your post also is a veiled attack on MVs by a presumption that they are "the product of an attempt to water down/negate/invalidate the scripture."

I must as you in my moderating capacity to refrain from such charges.

 

[Deacon]

The first English Bible printed in America was presented to Congress in October 1782 and was a KJV.

Interesting note to Congress by the archivist:

To the Honourable The Congress
of the United States of America
The Memorial of Robert Aitken
of the City of Philadelphia, Printer

Humbly Sheweth

That in every well regulated Government in Christendom The Sacred Books of the Old and New Testament, commonly called the Holy Bible, are printed and published under the Authority of the Sovereign Powers, in order to prevent the fatal confusion that would arise, and the alarming Injuries the Christian Faith might suffer from the Spurious and erroneous Editions of Divine Revelation. That your Memorialist has no doubt but this work is an Object worthy the attention of the Congress of the United States of America, who will not neglect spiritual security, while they are virtuously contending for temporal blessings. Under this persuasion your Memorialist begs leave to inform your Honours That he both begun and made considerable progress in a neat Edition of the Holy Scriptures for the use of schools,

I visited the Smithsonian at the end of last year and was able to see the first translation done in America: the Algonquin Bible translation, 1663 by John Eliot

And the German Bible, printed by Christopher Saur and his sons in done in nearby Germantown, Pennsylvania, in 1743, 1763 and I 776.

Rob

 

[NaasPreacher (C4K)]

Now that would be a good precedent for us to follow - lets have Congress approve all new versions .

 

[HankD]

Psalm 12:6-7

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

Personally, I am not KJVO but have watched it from it's modern "beginnings" (Wilkerson, Ray, Ruckman).​

I believe both "sides" of the KJVO issue from the beginning has had misunderstandings of the impact of this passage and believe with conviction that this passage specifically applies to the "words" of God.
Normally, I dont comment because it usually ends badly.​

FWIW, I'll make an exception.​

I have studied Hebrew both formally (Calvary Bible College and Seminary) and privately.​

Even at an undergraduate level it is taught that Hebrew does not necessarily keep gender and/or number even in the same statement.
That fact has been proven with examples here on the BB in times past. As an example the word for the "Spirit" of God is Ruach and is usually feminine yet can be masculine. Gender in Hebrew has more to do with the submissive-dominant question.​

IMO, Nothing can be proven (in this passage) by appealing to gender and number consitency.​

However, in my estimation the application of this passage which they have translated correctly (IMO) has been completely misunderstood by our KJVO brethren from the beginning.​

Fact: the proliferation of translations in English is greater than any other language on earth and IMO that fact completely fulfills this passage in every jot and tittle.​

Why?​

Because no singular translation can exactly translate from the original languages into the receptor language the precise meaning of any given passage.​

The amazing fact is that the KJV translators were fully aware of this undeniable truth:​

. Therefore as S. Augustine saith, that variety of Translations is profitable for the finding out of the sense of the Scriptures:

KJV Translators: ​

THE TRANSLATORS TO THE READER Preface to the King James Version 1611

With the proper software an individual can call up any passage of the Scripture on a PC in more than 20 English versions and several English traslations of ancient versions (LXX, Vulgate, Peshitto, Italic, etc) in order to find out the "sense" of the original language passage.​

I admire the zeal of the KJVO folks but IMO they need the scales to fall from their eyes to see what God has provided for the 21st century English speaking believer. Something no other culture has been blessed with in this proliferation of versions and tools in the English language to find the "sense" of the Scripture.

KJV Psalm 12:6 The words of the LORD are pure words: as silver tried in a furnace of earth, purified seven times.

ASV Psalm 12:6 The words of Jehovah are pure words; As silver tried in a furnace on the earth, Purified seven times.​

NIV Psalm 12:6 And the words of the LORD are flawless, like silver refined in a furnace of clay, purified seven times.​

NAS Psalm 12:6 The words of the LORD are pure words; As silver tried in a furnace on the earth, refined seven times.​

RSV Psalm 12:6 The promises of the LORD are promises that are pure, silver refined in a furnace on the ground, purified seven times.​

NKJ Psalm 12:6 The words of the LORD are pure words, Like silver tried in a furnace of earth, Purified seven times.​

DRA Psalm 11:7 The words of the Lord are pure words: as silver tried by the fire, purged from the earth, refined seven times.​

DBY Psalm 12:6 The words of Jehovah are pure words, silver tried in the furnace of earth, purified seven times.​

BBE Psalm 12:6 The words of the Lord are true words: like silver tested by fire and burned clean seven times.​

NAB Psalm 12:7 IV The promises of the LORD are sure, silver refined in a crucible, silver purified seven times.​

LXX Psalm 12:6 The oracles of the Lord are pure oracles; as silver tried in the fire, proved in a furnace of earth, purified seven times.​

​

​

 

[Mexdeaf]

The topic of the thread is regarding the the beginnings of KJVO, not why the MV's are a reality. Your post also is a veiled attack on MVs by a presumption that they are "the product of an attempt to water down/negate/invalidate the scripture."

I must as you in my moderating capacity to refrain from such charges.

C4K,

Although I agree that Mongol Servant's question is a little 'loaded', I think he has proved that he is attempting to provoke discussion rather than dissention so with your kind permission I will attempt to answer his question-

Mongol Servant-

To answer your question, let me ask one of my own: If in fact the MV's are an 'attempt to water down/negate/invalidate the scripture', can you point out to us one false religion that has sprung up as a product of the MV's?

 

[robycop3]

many other parts of KJVO have originated in recent times, often from some modern author who attempts to apply 17th century English to modern English while ignoring the fact that many words used then have different meanings now. A classic example of this is "The KJV is the only version that tells us to STUDY." (2 Tim. 2:15)

WE define 'study' as a verb to mean'examine closely with the intent of learning' while in the 17th C. it also meant 'endeavor, work diligently', which is almost exactly what the Greek 'spoudazo' means. Thus, in 2 Tim. 2:15, 'study' is correct, but so is 'endeavor, work diligently', etc. in MVs. Thus, in KJVO, we have a misapplication by a zealot or book seller who failed to do any STUDY him/herself before making a rash statement. I dunno who started that false statement, but I've seen it in several pro-KJVO boox.

Again, this is but one example of misapplication of 17th C. English to 21st C. usage. There are several more within the realm of the KJVO doctrine. I dunno their origins, but one can easily see a lacka reserach on the part of the authors who use'em.

Anyone wanna take a shot at who started the above "study" thingie?

BTW, I STUDY my Bible...every version I own. And I often hafta ENDEAVOR & WORK DILIGENTLY to do it. I hope everyone here does the same!

 

[Pastor_Bob]

A classic example of this is "The KJV is the only version that tells us to STUDY." (2 Tim. 2:15) I dunno who started that false statement, but I've seen it in several pro-KJVO boox.

I've not personally seen this position stated. Could you list a couple of the several books in which you've read it so that I can see if any of my books contain it? Title and page number will be sufficient; no need to put the quote in unless you just want to.

 

[robycop3]

I've not personally seen this position stated. Could you list a couple of the several books in which you've read it so that I can see if any of my books contain it? Title and page number will be sufficient; no need to put the quote in unless you just want to.

I can't find the BOOX right off, but I can find the pamphlets

http://www.av1611.org/nkjv.html

I've seen this in book form several years ago, but I don't recall just which book. I believe it may be in one of Dr. Lawrence Vance's boox, as he and Watkins are in cahoots producing propaganda at another site.

There's also an article by Dr. Michael E. Todd which repeats this incorrect idea. I believe he mighta copied something from worx by James Melton or M. H. Reynolds.( I believe nothing from Melton. He believes the false doctrine of the "seven church ages" as well as KJVO! I also completely disregard the garbage posted by such wing nuts as Nic Kizziah.)

I know Watkins', Melton's, & Todd's propaganda is available in pamphlet or booklet form, (Fighting back! by Melton)while Reynolds is the editor of Foundations magazine, I read his guesswork is in a past issue a few years back, but I can't remember which one. And i don't have time to do a web search right now.

Note: When reading the URL I posted, use the "cached" feature if ya wanna do a quick read only. Otherwise, if ya do a regular read, you'll see just how sleazy & fulla lies that the whole article is.(I hold Watkins' work in very low esteem; he's just another "koppie-Katt" who does no research of his own, and, as Riplinger, invents stuff as he goes.)

Sorry i couldn't be of any more help right now...

 

[Pastor_Bob]

In 2 Timothy 2:15, the NKJV (like the NIV, NASV, RSV, NRSV) remove that "obsolete" word - "study"! The only time you're told to "study" your Bible. AND THEY ZAP IT! Why don't they want you to "study" your Bible? Maybe they don't want you to look too close - you might find out what they've ACTUALLY done to your Bible! The "real" KJV is the only English Bible in the world that instructs you to "study" your Bible!

The above quote is from the website robycop3 referenced. To my knowledge, I have not read this position in any book that I own or have read. I am a bit disappointed that the author of this website would state this position. It is clearly an inaccurate statement. This is one difference in the MVs that is not an error and does nothing to the integrity of the translation.

 

[Askjo]

Having grown up in the IFB movement, the first I ever heard the KJV being defended was in about 1973 at TTU, where Dr. Lee Roberson announced in chapel that no more discussions would be allowed on campus about the issue.

because he has 2 sides of professors at TTU.

 

[Askjo]

I began reading all the material I could get on the textual issue (multiple variants, manuscript evidence, backgrounds of people involved,etc.) and saw numerous problems with the MVs.

True, I saw that, too. I researched them since about 15 years.

 

[Tom Butler]

I can't add anything to the history of the KJVO movement, but merely observe how sheltered a life I have led on this matter.

About ten years ago, a couple joined our church (they were from an IFB background, our church is SBC). They were faithful and regular, but then suddenly they were gone. When I inquired about it, my pastor said the left because they were KJVO, and our church is not.

That was the first I had ever heard of the term. Oh, I had heard some of my pastors rail against the RSV, but never heard KJVO articulated. And I had been a Christian and a Baptist for 50 years at the time.

Then again, I never knew what a liberal Christian was until I got to college at a Baptist school, and periodically pastors would come on campus to the President's office to complain about what was being taught. At the time, in the 1950s, I thought all Baptists believed everything the same.

As I said, a sheltered life.

And boy, is the Baptist Board opening my eyes to other incredible things some Baptists believe.

 

[Mexdeaf]

because he has 2 sides of professors at TTU.

No, it was because the radicals (students) were disrupting classes and causing problems. The professors did not have any problems amongst themselves. I KNOW because I was THERE. I could tell you some stories.... but I won't because it is not in the tenor of the OP.

 

[Ed Edwards]

Quoted KJVO strawman:

The "real" KJV is the only English Bible
in the world that instructs you to "study" your Bible!

Wrong: here is a Bible in the English and in the world that instructs
one to 'study' their Bible:

2 Ti 2:15 (Geneva Bible of 1587):
Studie to shewe thy selfe approued vnto God,
a workeman that needeth not to be ashamed,
diuiding the worde of trueth aright.

As with all proofs, one false example blows the
whole statement.

Now if the statement had of said:

The "real" KJV is among the few English Bibles
in the world which instructs you to "study" your Bible!

BTW, which one of the KJVs is the
"real" KJV?

 

[NaasPreacher (C4K)]

because he has 2 sides of professors at TTU.

Clear error and a case of judging a man's motives without knowing the facts. Some of us were there in those days and do know the whole story

 

[Keith M]

Quoted KJVO strawman:


Wrong: here is a Bible in the English and in the world that instructs
one to 'study' their Bible:

2 Ti 2:15 (Geneva Bible of 1587):
Studie to shewe thy selfe approued vnto God,
a workeman that needeth not to be ashamed,
diuiding the worde of trueth aright.

As with all proofs, one false example blows the
whole statement.

Now if the statement had of said:

The "real" KJV is among the few English Bibles
in the world which instructs you to "study" your Bible!

BTW, which one of the KJVs is the
"real" KJV?

As with the majority of blanket claims, one example to the contrary disproves the statement. Ed, your example is not the only English Bible to use the word "study" in 2 Timothy 2:15.

Study and be eager and do your utmost to present yourself to God approved (tested by trial), a workman who has no cause to be ashamed, correctly analyzing and accurately dividing [rightly handling and skillfully teaching] the Word of Truth. Amplified Bible

Carefully study to present thyself approved unto God, a workman that needeth not to be ashamed, rightly handling the word of truth. Douay-Rheims Bible

Study to show thyself approved to God, a workman that needeth not to be ashamed, rightly dividing the word of truth. Webster Bible

Studie to shewe thy selfe approued vnto God, a workman not to be ashamed, rightlie deuidyng the worde of trueth. The Bishops' Bible (1568)

Study to shewe thy selfe vnto God a laudable workman, that nedeth not to be ashamed, deuydynge the worde of trueth iustly. Miles Coverdale Bible (1535)

Study to shewe thy silfe laudable vnto god a workman yt nedeth not to be a shamed dividynge the worde of trueth iustly Tyndale New Testament (1526)

The majority of English Bible translations up to the 1611 KJV and its later revisions used the word "study" here. The vast majority of English Bible translations after the KJVs did not. The antiquated meaning of "study" apprently fell out of use sometime after 1611 and later versions reflect this change. Although the word was fine for Bible translations up through 1611 better choices were available (and used) in later tranlations.

Sorry for the digression from the topic of discussion, the roots of the KJVO movement.

 

[Askjo]

Clear error and a case of judging a man's motives without knowing the facts. Some of us were there in those days and do know the whole story

I refuse to give you these names of Professors from TTU. I was there and received the information from there. I read it and realized something wrong with TTU. I chatted with a preacher who was graduated from TTU. I asked him a few questions concerning these Professors. We discussed about them and agreed each other. He knew these professors whom I talked about. On other word, remember David Cloud’s testimony? He was graduated from TTU and knows the fact, too. I also agreed with him.

Many colleges such as TTU, Liberty University and others, hired very highly qualified Professors more important than their Bible faith. They are interested in Professor’s credentials more important than their Bible faith. They abandoned the Bible Faith in favor of human reasoning.