Is the KJVO "movement" dying?

[Gorship]

I ask this for your opinions, thoughts, and insights.

 

I sometimes post on another board and (hopefully its ok) I would like to link a thread that is going on over there. NOT so that we can all march over there and say "huzzah! you're wrong!" but rather I would like to have this discussion on here. I will probably be starting another thread I would like to get some more opinions on that is in tandem to this thread but worthy of a secondary set of thought patterns.

 

Without futher ado this is the link:

Click me! 

So the thread there is pretty simple: 

Apparently DBS is "Fractured" due to Riplingers divorces (although Dean burgeon has been a TR-Only group not  KJVO group but anyway)
Ruckman has passed away
Steven Anderson is a menace (which I don't disagree with)
Etc..

Do you see the KJB issue still in full force or not?
 

[swathdiver]

People of little faith!  God said he would preserve His Word and he does not need Riplinger, Ruckman, Anderson, or anyone else to keep it in front of the saints for Him!

 

There is no alternative, one either hold God's preserved word in their hands or a counterfeit. 

[AdamL]

I may get ostracized for this but I am going to share my opinion anyway...

The King James Only Movement is tied to Independent Fundamental Baptists. Other than some snake handling type charismatics and Mormons I cannot think of any other groups that exclusively use the KJV (although I would feel confident in saying they do not believe the KJV is the word of God). Because the two are tied together what effects 1 will effect the other. It is my personal opinion that the IFB movement is floundering.

In my opinion the movement was supported by strong personalities that were able to rally large followings behind them. Men like Jack Hyles, Tom Malone, Lester Roloff, etc. These men had huge ministries, many with large Bible colleges. These men are gone and what happened to their ministries? They are gone as well. Midwestern is now basically an online correspondence school, Tennessee Temple is gone, First Baptist Hammond (Hyles-Anderson) is a shell of what it used to be. Scandals that followed some of these men did not help matters any. This leads me to a glaring conclusion, these ministries were built upon men, not upon Jesus Christ.

Now that these Giants in the movement are gone those that learned under them are for the most part unwilling to adapt to changing cultures and instead parrot what they have been taught without being able to attract followers the way their predecessors did. Adapting does not mean compromising. In order to adapt we don't have to change the Bible version we use, we don't have to bring in guitars and drums and huge electronic screens. We might want to consider changing the way we are reaching people. We might want to consider leaving behind shallow topical preaching that is just screaming about women wearing pants or that the movie theater is the devil's playground. We might want to consider actually teaching the Bible and engaging people that have questions and are searching for answers. We might want to consider actually presenting who God is and what the Gospel is to people instead of rushing through the Romans Road and trying to get the person you just woke up on a Saturday morning to pray a prayer.

Shallow preaching, weak evangelism, and refusal to change our methods will finish off what is left of the IFB movement. When we send missionaries out to foreign lands do we expect them to do things exactly the same way we do them here in America? I surely hope not. We have seen evidence from this board that knocking on doors is not culturally acceptable in certain countries, in some places it may even be illegal. So our missionaries find different ways to reach people. Why can't we do that here? Why must we continue to go door knocking every Saturday morning at 10 am regardless of the fact that only 1 out of 10 people answer the door and that 1 doesn't care what you have to say?

I will tell you that with this Millennial Generation that is coming up the only way you will reach them is to be able to answer their questions. Answers like this is the way it is or do it because I said so is not going to go anywhere with them. They are not going to listen to someone read a passage from the Bible and then scream about women wearing pants and rock music for 45 minutes never referencing the biblical passage again. You can say well then forget them we don't need them. But that is not going to work for the church in America. If the church in America is to continue then we must reach them or we will go the way the church in Europe has gone. Would anyone have thought 400 years ago that missionaries would be going into Europe? Well if we keep up the way we are going missionaries are going to be coming to America instead of being sent from her.

If the IFB movement dies or floats off into obscurity the kjvo movement will as well. God's word will still be preserved and available but who will carry it forward? To continue to give God's word to a lost and dying world we must find new ways to reach people and teach them the Bible. Once we reach them God and the Gospel will do the work like He has for 2,000 years. The Romans Road is not the Gospel and very few to any new creatures in Christ will be made using it. And to present the Gospel you have to actually engage lost people. Our churches have to quit swapping members but convert the lost and disciple them in sound doctrine.

All of this is my opinion. I am an Independent Fundamental Baptist. I believe the King James Bible is God's word. I am disgruntled and frustrated. I want to see a stop to a reliance on man's way and a revival of God's way.

[Jim_Alaska]

I do not consider the KJV an "issue" at all unless my individual church decides to use something else in place of it. It only becomes an "issue" among those of "like faith and order" when they look outside of each local church and see other versions being used.

I also take exception to the idea that IFB is a "movement". Each local assembly is Independent, therefore cannot be considered a "movement." "Movements" come about when God's people look outside of their local assemblies and follow men because of their "strong personalities."

Once God's people start down this road it is only a small step in the direction of conventions and associations. The word "Independent" means exactly what is says, independent from any outside influence or control. Once we depart from this simple definition we are setting ourselves up for problems. Scripture records that the churches we read about in the Bible were independent; this is not a name, it is a definition that denotes the stand each church takes for the truth regarding any outside control.

[AdamL]

1 hour ago, Jim_Alaska said:

I also take exception to the idea that IFB is a "movement". Each local assembly is Independent, therefore cannot be considered a "movement." "Movements" come about when God's people look outside of their local assemblies and follow men because of their "strong personalities."

I apologise if the term "ifb movement" is offensive to you.  I certainly agree that that is not the way it is supposed to be at all. However when the vast majority of pastors of IFB churches are influenced and taught through the Jack Hyles method of ministry, through the college or his Pastor's school, that is what we have ended up with. 

I think the question is how do we get out of the mess that has been created?

Edited June 12, 2017 by AdamL
Spelling

[wretched]

3 hours ago, AdamL said:

This leads me to a glaring conclusion, these ministries were built upon men, not upon Jesus Christ.

Nailed it perfectly IMO....

[Jim_Alaska]

On 6/12/2017 at 8:10 AM, AdamL said:

I apologise if the term "ifb movement" is offensive to you.  I certainly agree that that is not the way it is supposed to be at all. However when the vast majority of pastors of IFB churches are influenced and taught through the Jack Hyles method of ministry, through the college or his Pastor's school, that is what we have ended up with. 

I think the question is how do we get out if the mess that has been created?

You have not offended me Bro. Adam. The exception I took was with the phrase "Movement", which is in widespread use today by many

As to your question regarding how we go about getting out of the mess that has been created, I would offer a solution that has been with us from the beginning. This consists of not allowing ourselves or our church members to be influenced by forces outside of our local assemblies.

Install men of God in our local churches that are sound in the faith and conform to the biblical qualifications for pastors which say that pastors should be "apt to teach". By educating our future leaders in the local assembly we circumvent the process of our future leaders being influenced by so-called "movements", colleges and opinions of popular men, rather than The truth once delivered to the saints.

I know this is unpopular and some may even think it impractical and perhaps even impossible. But this is the biblical example and not above the power of God to accomplish in our churches if we really want it.

I was very fortunate in being able to be educated by an old school Baptist missionary pastor who was not only "apt to teach", by was on a scale of actually being a bible scholar. Even his sermons could be and were used by him as a teaching tool.

Edited November 29, 2019 by Jim_Alaska
spelling

[Ukulelemike]

I do believe IFB DID become somewhat of a "movement" when strong personalities, like those mentioned above, (Hyles, Ruckman, etc) came on the scene and drew great numbers to themselves, to fly their banners, rather than the banner of Christ. When a church is filled with people wearing buttons that say "100% Hyles", that is a movement. I don't denigrate the good those men did, rather I am saddened by the gullibility of their followers, and their protectors, who kept them firmly upon the pillars to be worshiped in place of God. When a pastor becomes untouchable by criticism, that has become a movement.

HOwever, what isn't taken into account are the thousand of small IFB churches that don't follow those men, or their ways. I began in the quick prayerism camp, but discovered too soon how worthless it was, and that it produced no discernible fruit, so we have changed.

As for the KJV controversy, that existed before there was an IFB label, during the time shortly after Westcott and Hort produced their revised Greek version-there were already some championing the KJV and the TR that W&H sought to overthrow. So no one and nothing in the IFB camp, as it were, will make a difference.  

[No Nicolaitans]

16 hours ago, Jordan G said:

Do you see the KJB issue still in full force or not?

The following is my opinion based on my personal knowledge. I make no claim to speak authoritatively on the premise or subject...

How to answer this...hmmm...

There are still men who are "leading the cause" (for lack of better terminology). Such as, David Brown and Phil Stringer. However, I haven't kept up with either of them for well over a year. I could do a quick internet search to see what's up with them, but I have no interest in doing so.

KJVO did become a movement in my opinion. Here's the appropriate definition from Merriam Webster...

a series of organized activities working toward an objective; also :  an organized effort to promote or attain an end

From what I've seen personally, there are people (who had jumped on the KJVO bandwagon) that are leaving it. I think a lot of it has to do with "why" they got on the bandwagon in the first place. As has been pointed out, many (?) jumped on due to following a man. Many (?) are now leaving because they are once again following man. Many (?) left due to the controversy surrounding the man they were following. In leaving, they also renounced much of what IFBs believe and stand for. An IFB pastor is caught in sin, and people leave the church and renounce IFB beliefs altogether. I've seen it happen personally. I've been made party to it. My family was dragged into it (even though we were no longer members or attending the church...and hadn't been for over 10 years). I'm speaking from experience. It happens.

Some people leave KJVO, because they can't be ecumenical with such a stance...and coming together, loving each other, accepting differing doctrine for the sake of fellowship, etc. is more important (to them) than to stand alone. 

Some leave, because they have been enlightened by modern-day scholars who apparently know more than the men who translated the KJV.

Some leave, because they don't want to be made fun of.

...and the list goes on.

The fact of the matter is that if someone believes something, holds to it, is assured of it...nothing will ultimately sway them away from it. If people leave KJVO in finality, it's because they were never truly convinced of it in the first place. They got caught up in the screaming, yelling, circus-like atmosphere that so often accompanied the push and preaching for KJVO. They were entertained by it. When the entertainment ceases (for whatever reason), they move on. I don't know of any people who would sit in an empty lot after the circus has left...just to listen to the crickets chirping and gaze at the trash left behind.

It's all part of the latter-day falling away (in my opinion); in which, people will turn their ears from the truth.

Is the "KJVO Movement" dying? Hmmm...I would say...the "movement" does seem to be waning. However...that doesn't mean that the truth BEHIND the movement is dying. Truth never dies.

It's all rather simple to me...

1. Rely upon the single translation that was translated from the accepted manuscripts.
2. Rely upon various translations (that don't agree)...that were translated from manuscripts (that don't agree)...that were found in the possession of false religious systems.

It's a pretty obvious choice for me, and it doesn't take years of learning Greek, Hebrew, and Aramaic to see the difference. 

If the "movement" dies, that's okay with me. I've grown weary of the circus myself. I'll keep using, reading, studying, and trusting the King James Version only...whether James White likes it or not...and whether or not Steven Anderson has a nervous-jerkdown and gives KJVO a bad name.

I don't answer to James or Steven...I'm not trying to impress James or Steven...and just to be blunt, I could care less what either of them have to say on the issue. 

Hmmm...the accepted manuscripts as used for centuries...or...manuscripts that were hidden away in false religious systems? Hmmm...

Hmmm...God commanded us to study his word. Therefore, man should have access to his word...not just now...but in the past too. Hmmm...

Yet, if those manuscripts (that were found hidden away and in possession of false religious systems) are his actual words, then that means that God kept his actual word hidden from man...by default, disallowing man to study his word...even though he commanded us to study it. 

...and he entrusted his actual and true word to false religious systems. 

I don't know...the choice seems pretty simple to me...but that's me.

 

 

 

 

[wretched]

7 hours ago, Ukulelemike said:

I do believe IFB DID become somewhat of a "movement" when strong personalities, like those mentioned above, (Hyles, Ruckman, etc) came on the scene and drew great numbers to themselves, to fly their banners, rather than the banner of Christ. When a church is filled with people wearing buttons that say "100% Hyles", that is a movement. I don't denigrate the good those men did, rather I am saddened by the gullibility of their followers, and their protectors, who kept them firmly upon the pillars to be worshiped in place of God. When a pastor becomes untouchable by criticism, that has become a movement.

HOwever, what isn't taken into account are the thousand of small IFB churches that don't follow those men, or their ways. I began in the quick prayerism camp, but discovered too soon how worthless it was, and that it produced no discernible fruit, so we have changed.

As for the KJV controversy, that existed before there was an IFB label, during the time shortly after Westcott and Hort produced their revised Greek version-there were already some championing the KJV and the TR that W&H sought to overthrow. So no one and nothing in the IFB camp, as it were, will make a difference.  

Excellent synopsis IMO

[swathdiver]

22 hours ago, AdamL said:

They are not going to listen to someone read a passage from the Bible and then scream about women wearing pants and rock music for 45 minutes never referencing the biblical passage again. You can say well then forget them we don't need them. But that is not going to work for the church in America.

"So then faith cometh by hearing, and hearing by the word of God"  

It was not the Lord's main plan that people come to "church" to get saved as it is with the rock-n-rollers.  Most folks get saved outside of a New Testament church and then get baptized and join a NT church to get discipled.  

An unprepared heart will reject the pants and rock-n-roll sermon but a regenerated heart will listen and search the scriptures.

By and large we cannot change the law of entropy, that everything is winding down and getting worse with time.  Generally speaking, a local church becomes more liberal as it ages until it ceases to be a NT church; of the kind that Christ built and died for during his earthly ministry.  

Women from three and four generations previous to me would have never contemplated dressing like a man while ladies today make all manner of excuses to do so.  Same with their coverings.  Our pioneering forefathers cleared a forest and made a homestead from its trees with hand tools, while living without air-conditioning or vacations to Disneyland, while fighting off murderous indians, wild animals and disease.  Most of us today, myself included, lack a constitution 1/10 as strong as what they possessed.

The Lord Jesus promised that his churches will prevail against the gates of hell.  Lord willing, I shall always be a member of one until he calls me home.    

[Alan]

20 hours ago, Jim_Alaska said:

Install men of God in our local churches that are sound in the faith and conform to the biblical qualifications for pastors which say that pastors should be "apt to teach". By educating out future leaders in the local assembly we circumvent the process of our future leaders being influenced by so-called "movements", colleges and opinions of popular men, rather than The truth once delivered to the saints.

I know this is unpopular and some may even think it impractical and perhaps even impossible. But this is the biblical example and not above the power of God to accomplish in our churches if we really want it.

This is entirely correct.

The qualifications for a man to enter the ministry, to be the pastor in a local, New Testament, church is clearly listed in 1 Timothy 3:1-7 and Titus 1:10 All (all as in every one to the last man) of the men (and women), in the Charismatic churches, the Catholic church, the Reformed Churches, (including Reformed Baptist), are not qualified according 1 Timothy 3:1-7 and Titus 1:5-10

I do find fault with this thread as it seems that only the KJVO churches (and pastors), are at some fault. I did check out the forum, Baptist Board, that was referenced too. The members there disparage the KJV at will, use a variety of translations, and attend a variety of non-IFB churches. As usual, most of the non-KJV folks lash out at some fallen "leader," and use him to disparage KJV and Independent Baptist churches. The usual leaders are listed, Hyles, Anderson and Ruckman. And, the usual problems found in some of the IFB churches are listed. From a few pages that I read in the 'Baptist Board,' nobody made one critical remark about a non-KJVO individual. Interesting isn't it? All of the critical remarks were directed to KJVO men. 

The churches that are KJVO are about the only men, and churches, in our age that are even qualified to be in the ministry. 

As far as I am concerned, the whole issue is way out of proportion, led by (and fueled by), denominationalism, disgruntled saints, internet theologians, and internet forums. It almost seems that every time a pastor does preach on a 'hobby horse' he is food for the fodder and the congregation forgets the good that that pastor has done. If a pastor in a IFB church does not fit the qualifications of 1 Timothy 3:1-7 and Titus 1:5-10 then he should be put out of the ministry. If he does met the qualifications, than pray harder for him when he errors, preaches too many hobby horses, talks about tithing too much for your stomach, or some other subject you disagree with him. The average IFB pastor has enemies galore who non-stop abuse him verbally on every occasion. Why add to his sorrows?

 

 

Edited June 13, 2017 by Alan
grammer & scipture

[AdamL]

3 hours ago, swathdiver said:

An unprepared heart will reject the pants and rock-n-roll sermon but a regenerated heart will listen and search the scriptures.

I believe there is a big difference between preaching a sermon from I Timothy chapter 2 on modest dress or Titus chapter 2 on worldliness and reading 1 or 2 verses of Scripture and then screaming about women wearing pants.  That was my point.

Both my wife and my daughter only wear skirts and dresses.  I threw away all of my rock and roll and worldly music about 8 months after I got saved.  These changes happened because through studying the Scriptures the Holy Spirit taught me and I brought these things to my wife and we studies them together and made a decision to obey. 

I am in the Navy so I do quite a bit of traveling. Whenever I am traveling for work or on vacation I find a local church to go to wherever I am.  I also have been recommended many preachers and watched and listened to sermons online. There are some very good preachers from the samplings I have had but there is also a great number that will read a passage and never reference it again and scream about their pet peeves or tell stories for 45 minutes.  That is not preaching and it is certainly not doing anything for the Body of Christ.

[Alan]

Brethren

I just thought I would give you one sample (of many), of thoughts of what some of the brethren at Baptist Board think concerning the KJVO brethren:

"The current edition of the KJVO myth is based upon 7TH DAY ADVENTIST official Dr. Benjamin Wilkinson's 1930 book, Our Authorized Bible Vindicated, (which was written in response to a squabble within his cult, not to start a new doctrine) and its being copied and hyped by several later "authors" using modern media to promote their wares. It's just a collection of old KJVO ideas, coupled with the fault-finding in newer versions by newer generations of KJVOs. It's the same ole garbage in a newly-painted dumpster.

However, a key, cardinal question KJVOs cannot answer correctly is BY WHAT AUTHORITY do they believe KJVO. it is NOT found in the KJV itself, nor in any of its sources. As baptists, we believe SCRIPTURE is the highest authority we have on earth for all matters of faith and worship, and there's so hint of KJVO in Scripture, by the least quark of the slightest implication.

Therefore, KJVO is simply another false, extra-Scriptural man-made doctrine. But, unfortunately, as several of you have said, it'll continue on, but I believe, it'll be much-more diminished as time passes. (After all, there are still "Flat-Earthers"!)"

By the way, the above quote is from the last person who posted on the Baptist Board today (I will forbear giving you his avatar name).

Edited June 13, 2017 by Alan
grammer

[Ukulelemike]

2 hours ago, AdamL said:

I believe there is a big difference between preaching a sermon from I Timothy chapter 2 on modest dress or Titus chapter 2 on worldliness and reading 1 or 2 verses of Scripture and then screaming about women wearing pants.  That was my point.

Both my wife and my daughter only wear skirts and dresses.  I threw away all of my rock and roll and worldly music about 8 months after I got saved.  These changes happened because through studying the Scriptures the Holy Spirit taught me and I brought these things to my wife and we studies them together and made a decision to obey. 

I am in the Navy so I do quite a bit of traveling. Whenever I am traveling for work or on vacation I find a local church to go to wherever I am.  I also have been recommended many preachers and watched and listened to sermons online. There are some very good preachers from the samplings I have had but there is also a great number that will read a passage and never reference it again and scream about their pet peeves or tell stories for 45 minutes.  That is not preaching and it is certainly not doing anything for the Body of Christ.

Boy I understand the Navy issue. I was fortunate to be in some places with very good churches, though I wasn't always a very good Christian; but the influiences of those churches eventually broke through. San Diego I attended, first time through, Midway Baptist church, which I honestly don't remember much about; Long Beach I attended First Baptist Church of Long Beach, my very first IFB church, where I becamse IFB and have been since. at the time the pastor was Larry Chappel (or Chapell, not sure which); I heard some time after we left he fell away but I never knew any details. In Bremerton Washington I joined Westside Baptist church, then back to San Diego, Lighthouse Baptist under Doug Fisher. That was where I answered the call to full-time ministry.

The music issue, for me, was the CCM, back in the 80's and early 90's, when of course, they were getting bigger. It got into it for a while, before there was a lot of preaching or teaching about/against it, and for a few years I rocked out to some 'Christian' rock. But over time, and just really simple observation, the Lord gave me discernment to see that they were really little different from anything the world offerred, and so I removed them from my life, as well. I'm not sure if having had some pretty good music training growing up made the difference, being from a very musical family, and my parents being formally trained singers in particularly Christian music, pre-CCM.