Kjvo?

Well, for what "Fundamentalism" is, or at least was, you might read something called "The Fundamentals", a series of some 90 plus 'essays' from around the first two decades of the 20th Century. BTW, If my memory is not failing me, I don't recall a single one 'dedicated' to any KJVO idea. Some of the authors, to name a few, include Attorney Philip Mauro, R. A. Torrey, E. Y. Mullins, Arthur T. Pierson, Thomas Spurgeon, B.B.Warfield, Sir Robert Anderson, James Orr, and Arno C. Gaebelein. That'll do for a start.

Ed

 

Thanks Ed, I'll look for that and check it out.

Now I am attempting to defer to ya'll as I recognize that I'm not as learned on this topic. However, I keep hearing this argument that the old guys did not discuss the KJVO idea. I'm not sure that this argument is convincing as I don't know why anyone would expect them to address this topic when it was a settled issue. They didn't have to contend with 100+ new "Bibles" that have been released in the 20th century. Why is there an expectation that they would have addressed a topic that was a non-issue?

 

According to some 'authorities' is was an issue. You recall that the RSV was released in 1881 and the ASV in 1901. And they caused a ruckus upon their release. I have in my library an AV Bible published in 1914 which listed in one of the Appendixes ALL of the verse and word changes of the RSV.
A protion of the title of that Appendix says ..."Important Passages Changed by the Revisers". And it lists them side by side with the RSV and AV. It does not list the ASV since it is just an American Version of the RSV. FYI and FWIW.

 

I studiously avoid the KJVO arguments -'er I mean discussions, from any perspective, as a rule. I do not ignore history, however. With all due respect, av1611jim, please get your 'authorities' and 'facts' straight. The 1881 version was the R. V., or Revised Version, not the RSV.

The RSV purported itself as a 'revision' of the ASV, but is in fact, far removed from the ASV. (Actually, it is more closely akin to the NIV, in much of its approach.)

The RSV , or Revised Standard Version, did not come into existence until 1946 for the New Testament and 1952 for the Old Testament, and was then published as the RSV, and the RSV itself, was somewhat revised in 1971. It also has been 'amended' with the Apocrypha, published in 1957; a 'Roman Catholic' edition in 1966; an 'Ecumenical Edition', so-named "Common Bible" in 1973; and "Ecumenical Study Bible" in 1977. Each edition after 1952, had more apocryphal and deutero-canonical books than the previous edition.

So I seriously doubt that the 1914 AV, had anything about the RSV, since none of it would be around for some 30-40 years, but rather referred to the R.V. of 1881.

'Champion' whatever version you may wish, but please get the facts straight. It's only when we 'get it straight', that we can 'tell it straight', as one individual said.

Oh yeah! FYI and FWIW.

Ed

 

My bad. Sorry.
It is the RV. You are correct.
See what one letter does to communication?
That is why.... I am an AV man. Not MV. For example, the difference between 'alway' and 'always'. Or 'throughly' vs 'thoroughly' . Or 'example' vs 'ensample'. One letter makes a huge difference in communication and understanding and meaning.
And now back to the topic...
Sorry for the temporary derailing of the thread...
My point still stands. The KJV vs 'whatever' has been an issue loooooooong before the seventies, as some on this board contend.
Many 'old timers' did address the issue. Way back when W/H were inventing their new text.

 

Last warning folks - this is the author's request. The thread will be closed if posters continue to ignore his wishes.

 

Can you give more info about this Bible... I would love to see a copy of it.
Or maybe even find one for myself. It sounds interesting.

 

That depends on how you define KJVO. Somewhere in this Board there is a site where "KJVO" is defined.

If you mean "radical" (my term) KJVO which says that the KJV is The Word of God inspired a second time in the 17th century Elizabethan-Jacobean period English and in addition is "advanced revelation" (that the so-called "errors" are in reality a revelation yet to be understood or made known) then no, there are not many churches IFB or otherwise that subcribe to those doctrine.

On the other hand some churches will preach only from the KJV but have no official doctrine as to modern versions. There are quite a few more of those, how many, I don't know.

As an semi-educated guess, I would say most IFB churches are not KJVO, a small minority are "radical" KJVO with another perhaps large minority of KJVP (prefered) churches.

HankD

 

I've run across some churches that were effectively KJVO in practice, if not in 'writing'. I do not know whether all or any were necessarily IFB.

Sorry, kubel and C4K if I got off-track, before. I just would not let a falsehood stand.

Ed

 

This pertains to our IFB church. :godisgood:

 

My dad has been looking for a good IFB church in central WV that is not KJVO...
If you know of one, please let me know.

Guess what? They all are KJVO!!!

Some he has been to will not even let him carry a NIV into the building!
So....

In the area I grew up in, all IFB churches are now KJVO churches, and most will advertise "1611 KJV IFB church"

A couple yrs ago, KJVOism even infiltrated ABCUSA churches in central WV. And it has split good churches. And the churches that went KJVO lost good members, and are still bleeding good members to non-KJVO churches that are reaching out to the lost and bringing them to Christ.

To answer the OP, I know of very few IFB churches in WV that are not KJVO... most even have amended their constitution and statements of faith to include it....

When I grew up in the 70s and 80s in IFB churches we never had this fight... we even had a revival where the minister preached from the RSV.

But something happened in the 90s that changed the IFB churches here to KJVO.

 

Then again, maybe I am wrong - left the US in 1995 and have been back very little.

PM me re: your dad's look for a church. I know of a couple in WV.

 

99% of the history of the KJVO (King James Version Onlyism)
movement has occurred after I became a Christian
(& member of a Baptist Church). For me it has NOT been
history but news. 99.4% of the books about KJVO have been
printed since I became an adult (at 21-years back then) in 1964.

 

Ed, you are telling your age!!!

Are you sure you were an adult at 21???
Hee hee.... that is a good set up for a joke.

 

Since you made this wisecrack about me error in public, I'll respond in public.

It was not a "falsehood". It was an ERROR.
Falsehood is a practice. Error is unintentional. I acknowledged my ERROR. And you were ungracious enough to ignore it and post this slander.
Retract please. If you care to carry this on. PM me.

 

Dictionary definition of "falsehood" -" An untrue statement."

Hence I do not retract my statement, although it was certainly not intended to be an "attack", and as it, being a true statement, was certainly not "slander". How gracious I may or may not be, is for others to decide, you included.

The OP asks

Answer: I do not know about "most", but I found a large number that have some sort of this on their web sites.

BTW, Type in IFB - KJVO, and this very thread on the BB, is the second item (out of over 1000) to show up on my "Mozilla Firefox" search.

Ed

 

I am certainly not going to allow a personal squabble to continue.