• 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!

Why do fundamentalists tend to use the KJV

Status
Not open for further replies.
NaasPreacher (C4K)

NaasPreacher (C4K)

Well-Known Member
Winman said:
We are supposed to live by faith, not scholarship.
Click to expand...

Faith in His word, not human reasoning. Which is why, while many IFB churches primarily use the KJT, only a tiny few make it a part of doctrine.

As stated earlier back when this thread was on topic, most IFB churches who use the KJT do so because of tradition. It was what we 'have always used' and some see no need to change now.

Most do not make it a doctrinal issue, just a matter of choice. This is a stand with which I have no problem.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
M

Mexdeaf

New Member
Winman said:
It is not back to square one. We do not know for an absolute fact all of the texts the KJB translators used to translate the KJB. There are approximately 30 different distinct versions of the TR printed over the years according to the Trinitarian Bible Society. We are not absolutely sure which texts the KJB translators used. There is evidence they accepted some texts outside the TR.

This is what I have said from day one, you will never be able to resolve this issue through scholarship. You must simply believe God's promise that he would preserve his exact words to all generations. It is not something you can prove.

Have you ever thought that in Jesus's day that there might have been men who challanged the scriptures? After all, Moses had written 1500 years before. Israel had been invaded and destroyed by enemies, the scriptures had been lost for periods of time...

I am sure there were men in those days who questioned the accuracy of the scriptures.

But Jesus nor any of the apostles ever doubted that the scriptures they had were the accurate and preserved word of God.

We are supposed to live by faith, not scholarship.
Click to expand...

Your own words argue against you. No one here doubts that we have the accurate and preserved Word of God. We just doubt that God thinks so highly of King James and of the Jacobean English language to make that the 'be all to end all' of English translations.
 
P

Phillip

<b>Moderator</b>
interesting

We have a local IFB church which relatives of mine attend. It is a small church and VERY KJVO. In fact, they have a symbol that consists of a cross with a KJV on one arm and 1611 on the other arm that covers half the stage. This symbol is used on all of their material.

I do attend now and then just to visit with relatives at their place of worship and just keep my mouth shut when that issue arises (at least once per sermon). I would say that this is one of the most radical of the KJVO's I have ever seen. . . . and imagine, I didn't know what a KJVO was until I was in my 40's (I'm in my 50's now). I have thought about taking at least one of my Greek NT's to visit, but I would hope they wouldn't do something at our church that is probably just as ridiculous if we were to compare it to actual Biblical theology.

Let me add that they are a GOOD group of Christians and with the exception of that issue they take their faith in Jesus seriously. I'm afriad, however, that if I were to argue with the theology I would become an enemy very quickly. That is the sad part.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
W

Winman

Active Member
How has it been derailed? The question was why so many fundamentalist churches tend to use the KJB? I answered showing several Statements of Faith from IFB churches that use only the KJB. This is a very direct answer to the OP and is no derailment whatsoever.

It is not tradition, it is because they believe the scriptures have been preserved in the Received Text upon which the KJB is based.
 
W

Winman

Active Member
Mexdeaf said:
Your own words argue against you. No one here doubts that we have the accurate and preserved Word of God. We just doubt that God thinks so highly of King James and of the Jacobean English language to make that the 'be all to end all' of English translations.
Click to expand...



[off topic]
 
Last edited by a moderator:
J

jbh28

Active Member
Winman said:
Fine, then which version is the preserved and inerrant word of God?

Please don't answer they all are, that is impossible and you know it. God warned not to add or diminish from his word. The Critical Text has nearly 3000 less words than the Received Text in the original Greek. Either the CT diminished God's words, or the RT added to God's words. But they are not the same and it is plain foolish to argue they can both be the preserved and inerrant word of God at the same time.

So, which version do you believe is the preserved and inerrant word of God?
Click to expand...
This would be the derailment. The thread isn't about kjv only.

Winman said:
How has it been derailed? The question was why so many fundamentalist churches tend to use the KJB? I answered showing several Statements of Faith from IFB churches that use only the KJB. This is a very direct answer to the OP and is no derailment whatsoever.

It is not tradition, it is because they believe the scriptures have been preserved in the Received Text upon which the KJB is based.
Click to expand...
If the question was why do kjv only churches use the KJV, then you would be onto something. But the thread is why do fundamentalist tend to use the KJV. Most, it is not because of KJV only.
 
M

Mexdeaf

New Member
To get back to the OP, the simple answer is tradition. Nothing wrong with that unless the tradition becomes a god.
 
W

Winman

Active Member
Mexdeaf said:
To get back to the OP, the simple answer is tradition. Nothing wrong with that unless the tradition becomes a god.
Click to expand...


That's baloney, tradition is not the reason. That is why I showed the Statement of Faith of several IFB churches. They all said they believed God's word was perserved in the Received Text. I could show you another 500 IFB churches that will say the same thing.
 
J

jbh28

Active Member
Winman said:
That's baloney, tradition is not the reason. That is why I showed the Statement of Faith of several IFB churches. They all said they believed God's word was perserved in the Received Text. I could show you another 500 IFB churches that will say the same thing.
Click to expand...

why don't you do that then
 
M

Mexdeaf

New Member
Winman said:
That's baloney, tradition is not the reason. That is why I showed the Statement of Faith of several IFB churches. They all said they believed God's word was perserved in the Received Text. I could show you another 500 IFB churches that will say the same thing.
Click to expand...

"Monkey see, monkey do" doesn't make it Scriptural. I could have shown you 500 IFB churches in the 70's that prohibited wire-rimmed glasses and guitars in the pulpit, but that doesn't make it right or wrong.
 
Dr. Bob

Dr. Bob

Administrator
Administrator
These must all be REVISED or NEW church doctrinal statements. None before 1965 that I've ever seen made such statements.

Many said the Bible was the inspired word of God but only after the Adventist's claim did any say only the KJV was the word of God. Adventist error was picked up (gracious word for plagiarized and stolen) and then passed on.

A whole new "doctrine" of "preservation of the KJV" or the "supposed KJV Greek manuscripts" had to be sucked out of the air. Then the poor missionaries with other languages - one our home church dropped was all upset because some Spanish translation was not based on the KJV. And a pastor at our camp rewrote the Greek to match the KJV (that leads to burning in hell imho) if you can imagine.

It is a modern phenomenon and hopefully, like the Adventists learned, it will run its course and be only a slight blip on the radar of fundamentalism.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top