Yuku free message boards

Actually, I was interested in your opinion about the dependence upon last days mentality that we KJVOers seem to all have. It seems to me that KJVOism isn't plausible except within the scenario that we are living in the near terminal generation. Am I right?

>>>The vast majority of KJV-onlyists are Dispensationalists as well,

Have you ever met, talked or corresponded with a KJVO that did not believe we were living in the near terminal generation? I haven't and I am surprised the argument itself hasn't turned on that axle. It seems to me that if an indefinite future can be reasonably and Biblically asserted, KJV onlyism would evaporate.

>>> I don't think KJVO is that dependent on "Last Days Madness".

That's curious. We KJVOs (I am a KJVO) associate modern versions with last times' apostasy (not necessarily heresy, mind you, but definitely a "falling away" from some former common faith). I was mainly curious to know why this issue has not become part of the mix. It seems crucial to the KJVO cause, especially the "Old English is Heaven's Language" variety. No big deal, I guess.

I think, however, this is an indication that there is a wide gap of non-comprehension between TCs and KJVOs. It is fairly obvious that most KJVOs do not give the benefit of the doubt to TCs motives, faith, or even their salvation, because in general, we do not really understand what makes them tick. I have tried to analyze the underlying worldview and motivation of "Bible correctors" I know personally for a number of years, and the more I understand them the better our conversation. But just as clear is that TCs do not really understand what motivates sincere, thinking KJVOs. In fact, in my experience, the most likely response to a statement like that is "Yeah, right, a 'thinking KJVO', that's a good one!" It's a little sad to me. I like good conversation.

Brianrw wrote: It is not last days "madness" (for how is it "mad" to believe what was written by holy men of God through inspiration of the Spirit?)--it is what has been handed down to us by the very apostles themselves.

Greenbranch wrote: I am not aware of knowing a single Christian who does not consider this "the last days".

Gary Demar (author of Last Days Madness) I think is a pre-millennialist himself. The book deals with the constant guessing at interpretations and applying the guess to the present situation. He lists a lot of failures, from y1k to Rabin's assasination. His point is that we bring discredit to the prophecies and to the gospel itself when we preach some dogmatic interpretation of prophecy as applying to something right now in the headlines. He especially is critical of the more popular modern interpreters such as Hal Lindsey and his imitators. (Incidentally, Gary Demar while mentioning them, fails to mark the significance of the many evangelical interpreters who turned out to be, ah, well, right, especially those who dealt with the rebirth of Israel, and who made specific predictions generations before they were fulfilled).

The "madness" then is not the believing of the prophecies, nor the pre-millennial interpretation of them, nor even the recognition that we are in the last days, but the fixation with daily headlines, and too much arrogance in interpretations. I have definitely been affected by this "madness."

My curiosity in this question has to do with the mutual understanding (or misunderstanding) between KJVOs and MVs. Is there a worldview difference? Do MVs or TCs see the world differently? Or is it entirely beside the point? KJVOs seem to universally believe dogmatically that we are witnessing the end in our generation. This is the fuel of our stubbornness, and unwillingness to change. We are in the midst of the predicted modern apostasy, we distrust the motives of science (from Lyell to Heisenberg), of government (from the school board to the UN), of mainstream Christianity (from missionary boards to Bible societies), we see apostasy in almost everything modern. (At least I do.)

Are MVs and TCs on a different foundation? Is there any accurate generalization that would explain why a MV does not automatically distrust a new Bible?

ODEP wrote: But I think that's where you're headed, isn't it? That KJV onlyism assumes that the world must end while English is still the most commonly used language throughtout the world... yes? And assuming that, if the use of English declines (which it shows no signs of at the moment), that the KJV only position will decline correspondingly...

Thank you for pertinent comments actually trying to address the issue at hand. However that isn't exctly where I'm headed. English is an important language, no doubt, and it is the most important language of our time, even including the numerical advantage of Mandarin. (Some estimate that about half of the world's population speaks English at least as a second language.) However, English might as well be Greek to a Spanish speaker. I don't think the KJV is God's word to Spanish speakers.

Actually, my thought on this is that KJVOs exist because of the obvious success of pre-milleniallism in the last centuries, and how neatly current events fit Biblical last days scenarios. KJVOs have a "hold fast" mentality (I think others might call it a "siege mentality"), and rightly so. If we are in the last days, and in the middle of apostasy, now is not the time to be "correcting" the old book according to our modern enlightenment.

Psm37 wrote: TC's want the Word to be translated in the languages of the common people. Why do KJVO's resist translating the Word into modern English? If there are scholars trustworthy enough to translate the Bible into languages around the world, why don't they trust any to translate it into modern English?

This is exactly my point. TCs don't have a clue what motivates KJVOs. I grew up in church, my father was a Baptist pastor. None of the preachers in my childhood corrected the Bible. The first experience I had with TC was a Plymouth Brethren pastor who in order to make some point about the Lord's Supper told me (in 1973) that the word "broken" isn't in the original of 1 Cor. 11.24. The man told me outright that my Bible was wrong, corrupt, and leading me astray. I had no answer, I didn't know Greek, I was ignorant. Later I found out he was lying. The word "broken" is so in "the original," in fact it is in better than 95 percent of all manuscripts of 1 Corinthians. Now I don't care who tells me the KJV is wrong, I don't trust them. I suspect their education, their evidence, and their motivation. I don't think they are of the devil, of course, I just recognize the "falling away" for what is, unbelief. In any war, people are forced to choose sides. In this war a lot of Christians have chosen the wrong side. Now when we object to Textual Criticism undermining faith in the old Bible, we are accused of being against translating the Bible into modern English. You assume scholars are "trustworthy" and I don't. I just wonder now if this is because of an incompatible world-view.