Is FBC KJV Only?

Norefund

Member
Registered
Joined
Feb 2, 2013
Messages
727
Reaction score
11
Points
18
In another thread, a back and forth recently occurred wherein the KJV-ness of FBC was kind of debated. People at FBC I speak with seem pretty KJV only oriented. They use references like "The KJV has the blood" and I have even heard the term "Devil's bible" in reference to modern version - specifically the NIV.

So, KJV Only or not?
 

Bruh

New member
Doctor
Registered
Joined
Aug 13, 2013
Messages
3,051
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Yes they are, no matter how BG tries to spin it.

They are KJVO to the core in all aspects. And they believe it is a sin for women to wear pants.
 

no value

New member
Registered
Joined
Jul 18, 2014
Messages
282
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Excerpt from Chapter 6 of Bible Wars: The King James-Only Phenomenon in the Church

Dr. Jack Hyles was a self-proclaimed leader of the independent, neo-fundamental Baptist movement in America. His mega-church in Hammond, IN was named by Christian Life magazine in 1972 as the World’s Largest Sunday School. For many years Jack Hyles held to the same balanced views of Bible translation as John R. Rice and other fundamentalist leaders of the time. Dr. Hyles and Dr. Rice traveled extensively throughout America preaching together in the 1970s and Hyles’ preaching reflected Rice’s balance. It was only after Dr. Rice’s death did Hyles emerge as the new self-proclaimed leader of independent fundamentalism. One of the first things Hyles did after his self-coronation was reverse his former position on Bible translations by wholeheartedly endorsing the radical beliefs of Peter Ruckman, although ironically in 1979 Hyles openly vowed he would expel any student from his college who advocated a Ruckmanite KJVO-position. Jack Hyles, from the early 1980s up until the time of his death in 2001 became a staunch member and leading advocate of radical KJVOism.

Jack Hyles’ reversal on the translation issue is troubling for several reasons; namely, because he had such a large congregation, Bible college, and even more influence throughout America as a popular conference speaker. Hyles’ influence continues today through the radical views of some of his disciples throughout America.

Hyles’ words and bizarre activities are well documented. For example, Jack Hyles’ once arrogantly proclaimed that the gospel ministry would collapse without him because “America needs me’ and to add insult to injury, consider this arrogant statement; “Just think how much destruction would happen to America and the churches if I quit.” He is also noted to have torn up modern Bibles from his pulpit and thrown the pieces out into an audience of congregants acting like ravening wolves. Furthermore, Hyles announced the KJV is the only inspired translation and even more outlandishly claimed if a personal worker dealing with a person seeking salvation used any other translation, the repenting sinner was not saved. This is truly interesting in light of the fact that Hyles at one time believed in the authority of the original ancient manuscript documents.

Jack Hyles’ repeated lionization of chief KJVO advocate Gail Riplinger validates his membership in the Ruckman cult. At his annual Pastor’s School in March of 1996 Hyles announced that he would “beautify the King James Bible” while at the same time “indict, convict, and sentence all other versions” in his much-publicized Trial of the Century. It was in that same program that he awarded Gail Riplinger an Honorary Doctorate from his Hyles-Anderson College after repeatedly referring to her book as a masterpiece although amazingly later confessed that he had read he book but did not understand it. And to illustrate the value of Hyles’ honorary doctorates, consider the fact that he also once conferred one on the late John R. Rice’s horse, MacArthur.
 

Norefund

Member
Registered
Joined
Feb 2, 2013
Messages
727
Reaction score
11
Points
18
I don't think Jack Schaap was KJV-only and he caught quite a bit of flack over it. Is Wilkerson?
 

Bruh

New member
Doctor
Registered
Joined
Aug 13, 2013
Messages
3,051
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Norefund said:
I don't think Jack Schaap was KJV-only and he caught quite a bit of flack over it. Is Wilkerson?
Yes he is, for the English speaking people.
 

Jrock

Member
Registered
Joined
Dec 20, 2013
Messages
102
Reaction score
2
Points
18
They would be "moderate" KJV Only in that they don't believe that the KJV was given by inspiration as the original manuscripts. But they do believe that the KJV is the preserved Word of God for the English speaking people.
 

bgwilkinson

Active member
Doctor
Registered
Joined
Feb 4, 2012
Messages
4,013
Reaction score
1
Points
36
Quote from our corporate by-laws.


Scripture
We believe the Word of God as found in the sixty-six (66) books from Genesis to Revelation is infallible and inerrant and perfect;1 it is the plenary and verbally inspired2 words of God to men.3 We believe God has also preserved every single word4 through the ages.

1 Psalm 12:6; Proverbs 30:5; 2 II Timothy 3:16; II Peter 1:21; 3 Deuteronomy 8:3; Matthew 4:4; 4 Isaiah 40:8; Matthew 5:18; Matthew 24:35; I Peter 1:25.

God has divinely preserved His words for English-speaking people in the King James Version. The King James Version is the translation used in any and all ministries of First Baptist Church for English-speaking people.




The footnote was a bone we included for those who lean KJVO.

We purposely excluded the word only from the footnote.

You could put any valid version in the place of KJV and there would be agreement.
 

rsc2a

New member
Doctor
Registered
Joined
Feb 23, 2012
Messages
7,797
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Sorry BGW...that's a KJVo position.
 

IFB X-Files

Active member
Doctor
Registered
Joined
Jan 10, 2013
Messages
2,183
Reaction score
18
Points
38
bgwilkinson said:
You could put any valid version in the place of KJV and there would be agreement.
LOL!  Not when I was there!  The place must really be slipping into apostasy if this is true (and I don't believe it is).
 

Bruh

New member
Doctor
Registered
Joined
Aug 13, 2013
Messages
3,051
Reaction score
0
Points
0
BG is full of it!!

He knows the church he is a member of is KJVO in all and every area of the KJVO debate. 

He believes his current pastor is looney bc his current pastor is KJVO. JW would not have agreed to be the pastor if FBCH was not KJVO.
 

rsc2a

New member
Doctor
Registered
Joined
Feb 23, 2012
Messages
7,797
Reaction score
0
Points
0
IFB X-Files said:
bgwilkinson said:
You could put any valid version in the place of KJV and there would be agreement.
LOL!  Not when I was there!  The place must really be slipping into apostasy if this is true (and I don't believe it is).
There are many ways to apostasize, but abandoning worship of a particular translation is not one. :)
 

bgwilkinson

Active member
Doctor
Registered
Joined
Feb 4, 2012
Messages
4,013
Reaction score
1
Points
36
JW agreed to our by-laws, they do not exclude those who are not KJVO.

I am certainly not KJVO.

 

RAIDER

Active member
Doctor
Registered
Joined
Jan 28, 2013
Messages
8,242
Reaction score
4
Points
38
bgwilkinson said:
JW agreed to our by-laws, they do not exclude those who are not KJVO.

I am certainly not KJVO.
As an honest deacon I think you should go to JW and tell him that you are not KJV only.  I'm sure he won't care.
 

Bruh

New member
Doctor
Registered
Joined
Aug 13, 2013
Messages
3,051
Reaction score
0
Points
0
RAIDER said:
bgwilkinson said:
JW agreed to our by-laws, they do not exclude those who are not KJVO.

I am certainly not KJVO.
As an honest deacon I think you should go to JW and tell him that you are not KJV only.  I'm sure he won't care.
He's gonna say JW knows, but he's full of it.
 

rsc2a

New member
Doctor
Registered
Joined
Feb 23, 2012
Messages
7,797
Reaction score
0
Points
0
What is FBC's teaching when differences are found in the KJV and other translations?
 

Jrock

Member
Registered
Joined
Dec 20, 2013
Messages
102
Reaction score
2
Points
18
The corporate by laws confirms what I thought. The Hebrew and Greek are inspired and preserved in the KJV. The only problem is which edition of the KJV or Textus Receptus? Also, the Textus Receptus differs with the Majority Text in almost 2000 places. The Textus Receptus published by The Trinitarian  Bible Society is a made up TR text to match the KJV word for word. These facts led me out of the KJV Only movement.
 

Bruh

New member
Doctor
Registered
Joined
Aug 13, 2013
Messages
3,051
Reaction score
0
Points
0
JS was crazy, but not crazy enough to replace the KJV at FBCH.

He spent money like a mad man, cursed ppl out said perverted things about the Lords table and other perverted things behind the pulpit BUT you bes believe he KNEW BETTER than to replace the KJV bible at FBCH.

From what I understand they were willing to cover up when he was molesting that teenage girl but if he would have attempted to replace the KJV bible they would have voted him out.
 

TidesofTruth

Member
Registered
Joined
May 14, 2014
Messages
466
Reaction score
3
Points
18
After hearing Bro. Wilkerson for some time now it seems that this is an issue that he doesn't want to fight over.  He uses the KJV.  He believes he holds in the kjv God's perfect preserved word.  It does not limit him from checking Greek and Hebrew whatsoever.  He doesn't seem to be one who believes the KJV corrects the originals. 

If a man wants to use the KJV as the Bible he preaches and studies out of then let the man do so.  It has proven to be trustworthy in both practice and influence for many hundreds of years now.

What I have a problem with is those who were once KJV who then decided to change their Bible of Choice to be just as much Judaizers being antagonistic of the KJV and any and all who use it. 

Baptist are Baptist for good reasons.  1 of them is soul liberty. 

Such pride and arrogance of the now more learned freebirders.  Its palpable.
 

Norefund

Member
Registered
Joined
Feb 2, 2013
Messages
727
Reaction score
11
Points
18
Is it antagonistic of the KJV to use an NIV or ASV and believe them to be better translations?

TidesofTruth said:
After hearing Bro. Wilkerson for some time now it seems that this is an issue that he doesn't want to fight over.  He uses the KJV.  He believes he holds in the kjv God's perfect preserved word.  It does not limit him from checking Greek and Hebrew whatsoever.  He doesn't seem to be one who believes the KJV corrects the originals. 

If a man wants to use the KJV as the Bible he preaches and studies out of then let the man do so.  It has proven to be trustworthy in both practice and influence for many hundreds of years now.

What I have a problem with is those who were once KJV who then decided to change their Bible of Choice to be just as much Judaizers being antagonistic of the KJV and any and all who use it. 

Baptist are Baptist for good reasons.  1 of them is soul liberty. 

Such pride and arrogance of the now more learned freebirders.  Its palpable.
 

TidesofTruth

Member
Registered
Joined
May 14, 2014
Messages
466
Reaction score
3
Points
18
Norefund said:
Is it antagonistic of the KJV to use an NIV or ASV and believe them to be better translations?

TidesofTruth said:
After hearing Bro. Wilkerson for some time now it seems that this is an issue that he doesn't want to fight over.  He uses the KJV.  He believes he holds in the kjv God's perfect preserved word.  It does not limit him from checking Greek and Hebrew whatsoever.  He doesn't seem to be one who believes the KJV corrects the originals. 

If a man wants to use the KJV as the Bible he preaches and studies out of then let the man do so.  It has proven to be trustworthy in both practice and influence for many hundreds of years now.

What I have a problem with is those who were once KJV who then decided to change their Bible of Choice to be just as much Judaizers being antagonistic of the KJV and any and all who use it. 

Baptist are Baptist for good reasons.  1 of them is soul liberty. 

Such pride and arrogance of the now more learned freebirders.  Its palpable.
No, use what you want.  Just leave those that use kjv alone and don't think you have any superiority over them.
 
Top