Posted on 08/27/2003 1:01:11 PM PDT by nobdysfool
7 REASONS WHY KJO SPREADS IN INDEPENDENT BAPTIST CHURCHES
by Gary R. Hudson
“And their message will spread like cancer" (II Timothy 2:17a, NKJV).
Recent incoming emails have stirred considerable thought on the question of why King James Onlyism is such a widespread problem throughout our Fundamental Baptist movement. The following seven reasons are the result of a fresh consideration of the problem together with observations spanning a twenty-two year study of the subject.
Reason #1: Ignorance on the true nature and history of the Biblical manuscripts, ancient versions, and translations. Such ignorance is usually a result of pastors and Christian workers who have not given themselves to an accurate study of the facts or have not properly completed their academic training for the ministry. With all the resources and opportunities available in our time, there is hardly an excuse for this type of neglect. Impatience that results in entering the ministry at a premature state (I Timothy 3:6; 5:22), or just plain laziness (II Timothy 2:15), seem to be among the major causes of such neglect. The congregations that are led by men of such deficiencies are as susceptible as their leaders to erroneous and often misleading materials on Bible manuscripts and translations, and even to false information on the King James Version itself. Neither is lack of leadership an excuse for the ignorance of the individual layman who is admonished to personal study (I Thes. 5:21). Accuracy of information is very often all that is needed to clear away much of the confusion that abounds.
Reason #2: It is an “easy” way out. Doug Kutilek has suggested, “It’s easy; you don’t have to THINK or study much. By opting for KJVO, there is no need to learn Hebrew or Greek, to learn anything about manuscripts, or the history of the English Bible or about textual criticism or anything else. Hence--it is the lazy man’s way out of having to seriously think and consider on these issues” (email, 8/31/00). From my own experience as a former advocate of King James Onlyism, I can attest to this. It was commonplace in those days to hear from my colleagues that “all we need and all we use to study and prepare for sermons is a Strong’s Concordance and a King James Bible!” (It was taken for granted that the Greek and Hebrew were of no real significance). More than appealing itself as just a simplified approach, King James Onlyism is a luxury: a convenient “alternative” to the disciplined study of the Biblical languages.
Some KJO pastors have large and thriving churches, and will sometimes point to the “success” of their ministries (baptisms, buildings, big-money offerings, schools, etc.), and say, “See! I have been able to do all of these wonderful works with just a King James Bible and without your ‘original Greek.’” Such men immediately find themselves at variance with the KJV itself and its translators, who wrote, “translated out of the original Greek” at the front of their New Testament. If it was not for the foundational “original Greek,” we would not even have the KJV. Hence, these men actually did not build their ministries without the help of the original Greek. But, this does not address the worst problem with such KJO claims; the worst thing here is of course the appeal to experience-oriented theology, the same appeal of Pentecostals and Charismatics (Matt. 7:22, 23). (Not surprisingly, these last two mentioned groups also take “easy way outs” to both sanctification and serious Biblical study). Numbers, offerings, attractive auditoriums, and large staffs do not prove one’s theology correct or even one’s methods Biblical. If they did, the Mormon Church is equally a “monument to truth.”
Reason #3: It seems to appeal to Biblical fundamentalism. KJO presents itself as doing “honor to God’s Word” by emphasizing “final authority,” "preservation,” and even Scripture itself. The first level of KJO teaching usually attempts to discredit modern English translations with “verse-comparison charts” that reveal alarming word “omissions” as “doctrinal attacks.” The real reasons for these “omissions” are rarely if ever mentioned, much less the helpful benefits of the newer translations in numerous passages. From this approach, KJOnlys proceed to discussions of how “God promised to preserve His Word” to the point of arguing that we must have it “every jot and tittle somewhere!” Hence, they badger questions, such as, “Which Bible is God’s Word?” and, “Where is the preserved Word of God???” These carefully worded ultimatums are hidden under the false and impractical demand for an absolutely infallible text or translation, supposing that only the most “orthodox” have the “answer” in the “infallible AV 1611.” (For a good treatment on KJO’s confusion of technical and generic terms, see “Holy Spirit Leadership and the Bible Translation Controversy” by Dr. Ron Minton on this website). The fact that the KJO position turns out to be flawed, inconsistent, impractical, non-historic, and even unbiblical reveals problem areas on its paper-trail of “logic.” Somewhere, somehow, on the “road to reason and faith” they have introduced logical fallacies. What “comes out in the wash” is a confused view of the “Word of God” under the guise of “honoring” it (I Cor. 14:33). The KJO position thus masquerades as “Biblical” and “Bible-believing” while actually believing myth (II Tim. 4:3, 4). A Christian who has become infected with KJOnlyism is unable to “stand” and “prove all things” (Eph. 6:13; II Thes. 5:21; Phil. 4:8). KJO in reality weakens the body of believers, renders their “view of the Bible” indefensible, and occasionally even wages assaults on the original language text itself (see article, “Easter in Acts 12:4,” etc., article on this website). It also puts fundamental Baptists in a position of being mocked as fools and unwise. When you have an attack on the original text, poking fun at the faith, and the spread of divisiveness and confusion in the body of believers, Satan is just around the corner.
Reason #4: “It soothes and consoles the spiritual insecurity of weak believers” (Doug Kutilek, ibid.). KJO advocates, particularly pastors, know they are playing-up to the minds of the insecure by presenting it as an “all or nothing” axiom: “Unless every word of my Bible (KJV) is infallible, I can’t trust any of it!” They are actually making a delicate area far more complicated by introducing KJO as a “solution.” The honorable and faithful role of Bible copying and translating is made “suspect,” and the problem of English mistranslation is made into a false dilemma. The KJO advocate cleverly sets up this false dilemma as a straw-man argument. KJO advocates seek for the weak and insecure because they know their teachings prey on such. This point is closely related to the next--
Reason #5: The strong appeal to human emotion. The emotional aspect of King James Onlyism makes its appeal in three areas: (1) fear, (2) pride, and (3) sensationalism.
1. Fear. There is a false fear of “snowballing into apostasy” if any other translation is used except the KJV. There is the fear of rejection and ridicule by “Bible-believers” if one is caught “red-handed” in church or elsewhere with the NIV or some other modern translation. There is the fear of everything from missing Sunday School to the “mark of the beast” if one questions a word of the KJV or uses another English translation. KJO often uses legalistic intimidation to push these issues.
2. Pride. KJOnlyism appeals to a form of exclusiveness and superiority that is found among members of non-Christian cults. It gives its adherents the feeling of having something greater than the average believer, an “edge” on “final authority” that makes them feel “above.” It reminds us of the “tongues” movement and its “baptism-in-the-holyghost initial evidence” exclusiveness: “You may be saved, but have you had ‘the baptism’?” is as divisive and exclusive as, “You may be saved, but do you have a copy of the Word of God?--If you do, where is it?? Which Bible?? Does your translation have mistakes?--Then how can it be God’s Word?? You see, I am not just a ‘believer,’ I don’t just use the Bible, I am a Bible-believer and I believe the Bible!” What they really mean is that they believe in infallible English translation, something no one in the Bible itself ever “believed” or even heard of.
3. Sensationalism. This “hype” usually finds its performance in the style of “sermon delivery” that preaches King James Onlyism. “They’re ATTACKING THE DEITY, THE VIRGIN BIRTH, AND THE BLOOD IN THESE NEW VERSIONS!!” “Why, they’ve HACKED MY BIBLE UP INTO LITTLE BITSY PIECES AND HANDED IT BACK TO ME AS ‘MORE ACCURATE TO THE ORIGINAL’!!” Why, they’re PER-VERSIONS, I TELL YOU, THAT’S WHAT THEY ARE!!” “I don’t know about YOU, brother, but I’ve got a Bible that’s inspired and infallible, WHAT DO YOU GOT??” And on and on it goes, priming the emotional pump. Sadly, there are too many people in our churches who accept what is said on the basis of how it is said, and KJO preachers know that how they say something has a great deal to do with whether or not the people will listen to it. Added to this current of spiraling emotion is the beautiful and poetic language of the KJV itself when quoted, together with “Old English-style” praying offered on the assumption of “reverence.”
Reason #6: Ignorance of our Baptist heritage. King James Onlyism is completely foreign to all of historic Christianity and even to the founders of the Independent Baptist movement in America. The historic view is and has always been the inspiration and inerrancy of the original language text alone and no translation thereof. Ignorance of this historic view is largely the fault of our church leaders who have not accurately expounded our roots. To the contrary, King James Onlyism is presented oftentimes as the “historic position” (see, for example, “David Otis Fuller’s Deceptive Treatment of Spurgeon Regarding the King James Version” by Doug Kutilek on this website; also, “The Unlearned Men” by Doug Kutilek also on this website). The very founders of our fundamental movement, if they were alive today and attempted from the pulpit their accepted practice of referring to the Greek to correct a word in the KJV, would, in some places, indeed be denounced as "apostates” and “Bible correctors.” If this does not reveal the level to which such ignorance has permeated, what does?
Reason #7: It is a political football ($$$). Several traditionally orthodox Bible colleges have become King James Only--not because its leaders necessarily hold to the teaching’s tenets, but because it gets students ($$$). Particularly, it gets people from KJO churches to attend their school, where “the KJV is believed,” etc. Pastors and churches also play this political game (especially in a day when “transfer growth” rather than conversion has become the norm), stealing members of other churches by assuring “a strong stand on the KJV.” Mission boards, too, have played this political football game, assuring supporting churches ($$$) of their “preserved KJV” view, even though these board directors themselves will privately disagree with KJOnlyism. We are living in a sad day indeed when the leaders of our fundamental Baptist movement can be bought and bribed by a divisive, reckless fringe.
CONCLUSION
The time has come for those of us who know and believe the truth to stand up to KJO and determine that we just will not tolerate or coddle it in any way shape or form. Every “cell” of this “cancer” needs to be traced down and obliterated so that it no longer reproduces itself in our ranks. The entire KJO movement needs to be exposed for the fraud that it is. The “politicians” who exploit this issue need to be faced and held accountable for their views. We must not fear what man may say about us or may do to us in this regard. Let it be clearly understood that KJO is a cult, and must be distinguished from true Biblical Christianity. Let the KJO movement become more exclusive and let it distinguish itself outside of and apart from the Church of Jesus Christ.
Therefore, stand. Stand up and fight for the faith (Jude 3)! THAT is the business of being a fundamentalist, and those who will not fight have no claim to the name.
Such Anglo-centered belief is dangerous to the church universal.
Spain has been Christian for 1700 years.
Hast thou NEVER read the Scriptures?
Isaiah 40:8
Maranatha!!
(Romans 10:17)
The other big problem, as stated in this article, is that other translations raise the "authoritative text" problem and illustrate that we have slightly different versions of quite a few Biblical texts. Of course most people don't realize that we have the same problem with Shakespeare's works, as well.
I also think that all Christians should be wary of using tradition as a justification: "And he said unto them, Full well ye reject the commandment of God, that ye may keep your own tradition."
But what about do the NIV do you specifically dislike? The flat, uninspiring language? The clumsiness of the prose? It's too-easy compromise with modern textual-critical ideas?
Does that make the NASB the Noticably Advanced Scripture Book?
Well, try not to be too hard on yourself ;^)
This can never be proven.
What we do know about King James I is that he was notorious for picking out nobles, with no other apparent qualifications than that they were young and handsome, and making them favored friends and courtiers.
He would go everywhere with them, give them pride of place at court functions and then he would suddenly have a falling out with one favorite and a new youth would take the favorite's place.
It may well have been nothing other than a unconscious thing that was never acted upon or a harmless personal eccentricity, but it caused much comment at court and elsewhere.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.