• 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!

Wikipedia-KJVO Article!

Status
Not open for further replies.
There IS NO Scripture to back it up,and you know it!

Just as no Scripture--any version or edition--supports Alexandrianism! Just as the KJB translators(an Alexandrian crutch,used whenever it suits their needs) rejected Alexandrianism.

Speaking of KJVO,when are you gonna back up your claims about me being KJVO? Remember?
 

Gold Dragon

Well-Known Member
Originally posted by David J:
The KJV translators would reject KJVOism.
They did in the preface to the 1611 KJV.

Bible Researcher : KJV Preface

...
Truly (good Christian Reader) we never thought from the beginning, that we should need to make a new Translation, nor yet to make of a bad one a good one, ... but to make a good one better, or out of many good ones, one principal good one, not justly to be excepted against; that hath been our endeavor, that our mark.
...
 

DeclareHim

New Member
KJV Preface

We affirm and avow, that the very meanest [worst] translation of the Bible in English...containeth the word of God, nay, is the word of God: as the King's speech which he uttered in Parliment, being translated into French, Dutch, Italian, and Latin, is still the King's speech, though it be not interpeted by every translator with the like grace, nor preadventure so fitly for phrase, nor so expressely for sense, every where."
I proudly stand with the translators of the 1611 KJV.
 

DeclareHim

New Member
Originally posted by David J:
If KJVOism is true then there should be Scripture(s) to support this belief. If not then it is a man made lie pushed forth as the gospel truth with NO SCRIPTURE(S) to support it.

The bottom line is KJVOism is a false man made doctrine. The history of the KJV proves KJVOism false. No "ifs" "ands" and "buts" about it. The KJV translators would reject KJVOism.
Amen I strongly second this post.
thumbs.gif
thumbs.gif
saint.gif
 

robycop3

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
Dr. Cassidy:That, in a nut shell, is exactly what KJVOs believe today. To try to say that the current KJVO position originated with Wilkinson is simply untrue and to continue to repeat it when you know it to be untrue is dishonest. We cannot defend a book of Truth with untruth!

While Riley was better-known than those whom he mentions, let's not forget that he was a professional theologian, with access to material not generally available to the public at large, and the works of these men were not generally offered at the friendly neighborhood book store.

In checking several libraries, I have not seen any whole books dedicated to KJVO that predate Wilkinson's. It simply was not water-cooler talk until fairly recent times, and just about every currently-read KJVO work has something in it taken from Wilkinson. Technically, Wilkinson's book is only as well-known as it now is because later authors such as Ray, Ruckman, & Fuller, copied from it, and from each other & used the modern media to spread their stuff.

The principle is the same as saying Hitler started the Aryan-Superman junk. This view had been around at least as early as Prof. Hegel's teachings in the 1840s, but it was given very little attention until Hitler came along. KJVO was given next-to-no attention until Wilkinson and his Koppie-Katz came along, & a whole movement was born.

How strange that many a Fundamentalist looks up to Riley as one of the "founding fathers" of their movement, but yet adds a doctrine to their beliefs that Riley was plainly against. We cannot blame that fact on those whom Riley was speaking against in your quote of him. It has a more modern source in Wilkinson's book & those who copied from it.
 

TCassidy

Late-Administator Emeritus
Administrator
Fine! Keep lying about it and give the KJVOs more ammunition to use against the truth!
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top