Why are Tiny Sectarian Internet Cults Usually KJO?

[Jeltja]

I am not criticizing the KJO position here. I do think it's an error but I don't have any special problem with the KJV. If you only want to use the 5e of the KJV that's perfectly fine with me, though I prefer by '95 NASB.

What I am curious about is why do many of the weird internet cults I see are KJO. These people are mostly American, have a random mix of beliefs which usually deny several elements of classical Christian views (non-Trinitarian, call Baptists non-Christian, and any number of esoteric exegesis no one had ever heard of before).

I am not even talking about major sects many Christians would put beyond the pale, like the LDS or Watchtower Society. No, these are either individuals or a tiny group who are affiliated with no church, who indeed feel no need to attend churches because they're all "false churches" according to the author of these poorly designed websites. These people are everywhere online, probably because they have too much free time and like trolling normal people on the internet.

Every time one of these people starts bothering me and telling me to reject Calvinism and embrace a bunch of doctrines never heard of by anyone before today they're always a KJVO person. I am not blaming the KJV for this, it teaches Orthodox Christianity. But some factor seems to attract one man pseudo Christian cult false prophets to the KJV.

 

[JStates]

Can you give specific examples? You use the word "many" so surely you are aware of many of these groups. I am not.

I'm functionally a King James only Christian, but I generally have attended Baptist or Bible churches, I am a Trinitarian, and pretty traditional (Biblical) when it comes to Christian doctrine.

 

[Jeltja]

These people are usually literally crazy and hate Calvinists, so I don't really keep track of them. And the reasons they reject Calvin are not your typical Arminian reasons, either.
here's an example:
Sword of the Valiant
A video claiming Baptists are not Christians
He's a non Trinitarian, the rambling statements on his site don't follow any creed but, more importantly, just bear little relation to historical Christian practice and exegesis.
If you go to Bible chat rooms you will often find similar people. They're not even sectarian in the sense of being a division of a division of another denomination, they just picked up a Bible, decided they don't need to bother with two thousand years of theology and history, and can believe whatever naive and tortured reading of the text matches their feelings.

If you're not aware of the legions of people like this on the internet you may just be in a different age and habit bracket from me. There are literally thousands of fideistic novelty micro churches (and every more common, people who don't go to church at all and just troll Christians online with schizophrenia posting).

 

[Combanitorics]

You have some kind of problem with private Bible study groups that meet online? Wow, that's like saying you have a problem with the first amendment. You know, one thing you could do if you run into a Bible study group whose theology you disagree with would jest eb to leave. There have been cases in court like that about the Watchtower Society, who you mention. As narrow minded as I think they are myself, the courts have repeatedly upheld their rights to do that. If you want to "get rid of them", you have to verbally tell them, "No, I don't want to meet you and study your version of the Bible". You can also get a "No Soliciting No Trespassing" sign for your door. It seems like internet sites would be easier to avoid/get rid of. You cancel your account and go away.

 

[Jeltja]

You have some kind of problem with private Bible study groups that meet online? Wow, that's like saying you have a problem with the first amendment. You know, one thing you could do if you run into a Bible study group whose theology you disagree with would jest eb to leave. There have been cases in court like that about the Watchtower Society, who you mention. As narrow minded as I think they are myself, the courts have repeatedly upheld their rights to do that. If you want to "get rid of them", you have to verbally tell them, "No, I don't want to meet you and study your version of the Bible". You can also get a "No Soliciting No Trespassing" sign for your door. It seems like internet sites would be easier to avoid/get rid of. You cancel your account and go away.

This has nothing to do with anything I was talking about so whatever.

 

[Lynx]

I am not criticizing the KJO position here. I do think it's an error but I don't have any special problem with the KJV. If you only want to use the 5e of the KJV that's perfectly fine with me, though I prefer by '95 NASB.

What I am curious about is why do many of the weird internet cults I see are KJO. These people are mostly American, have a random mix of beliefs which usually deny several elements of classical Christian views (non-Trinitarian, call Baptists non-Christian, and any number of esoteric exegesis no one had ever heard of before).

I am not even talking about major sects many Christians would put beyond the pale, like the LDS or Watchtower Society. No, these are either individuals or a tiny group who are affiliated with no church, who indeed feel no need to attend churches because they're all "false churches" according to the author of these poorly designed websites. These people are everywhere online, probably because they have too much free time and like trolling normal people on the internet.

Every time one of these people starts bothering me and telling me to reject Calvinism and embrace a bunch of doctrines never heard of by anyone before today they're always a KJVO person. I am not blaming the KJV for this, it teaches Orthodox Christianity. But some factor seems to attract one man pseudo Christian cult false prophets to the KJV.

Yup, I've noticed that too.

Mind you, KJV is my go-to version. But I've noticed a lot of KJV-only people also have weird (or maybe just selective... they select the parts of the Bible they want) beliefs.

Not saying ALL KJV-only people have odd beliefs. But there sure do seem to be a lot of them out there.

I've also noticed what you mentioned about the "all churches are sadly in error so I can't go to any of them" attitude paired with KJV-only a lot. Reminds me of the old saying: "If your revelation of truth is so esoteric that only you believe it, you are in a very dangerous place."

 

[Combanitorics]

Some extreme right wing political types still use the KJV just because it was current during the American Revolution. They are trying to rewrite English monarchial history by getting rid of the Israeli incident in which the country told God that they wanted a king, so they could be like everyone else. They are indeed weird, and their attempt to rewrite that incident or haze it out effects their interpretation of the rest of the Bible. Further to complicate affairs, England has almost nothing to do with Israel, except for the fact that both countries were occupied by Rome.

 

[Jeltja]

Mind you, KJV is my go-to version.

The NSSB95 came out the year before I was born, and that's the main translation I use. I also like the New World Translation (despite from some WS oddities), and Richmond Lattimore's New Testament. I have read through parts of the KJV and seen verses from it all over, but not studied with it often. I have a couple of Dutch translations, a Geneva and a Tyndall or however it's spelt but I have hardly ever touched them. I use my Logos, and my sons use Logos and a MacArthur Study Bible in NASB.

But I've noticed a lot of KJV-only people also...select...beliefs.

Lots of people do that in general, it's a symptom of a lack of serious Christian religion and anti intellectual culture.

Not saying ALL KJV-only people have odd beliefs... there...seem to be a lot of them...

There seems to be a high coincidence of anarchic variants of Baptism and Unitarianism which like the KJV. I am all about Sola Scriptura, but that doesn't mean paying no attention to the vast work done by the Church through God's grace.

the "all churches are sadly in error so I can't go to any of them" attitude paired with KJV-only a lot.

Yes and I suspect there's some cultural American reason these things cluster but I don't know enough about fundamentalist schismatics in general to create an answer.

 

[Lynx]

Yes and I suspect there's some cultural American reason these things cluster but I don't know enough about fundamentalist schismatics in general to create an answer.

Nah, it's a human nature thing. People like to have something to feel elitist about. Religious people make it religion.

When they meet another Christian they look first and foremost for something to disagree about. If you agree 100% with everything they believe, they will look even harder.

 

[Lanolin]

Sorry no idea but tends to be an American thing with KJV only crowd

the country that orignated the KJV never call I think that they call it the AV.

Its peculiar because Americans were big on independence you would think they would be NASB only.

What I do know is some KJV Bibles had special commentary and they only came in KJV editions the time, and that sort of skewed some scripture cos ppl relied on the commentary more than the actual scripture. there was one Bible called the Scofield Bible and cos Scofield was reading KJV it did not apply to other versions methinks

 

[JaumeJ]

I am not criticizing the KJO position here. I do think it's an error but I don't have any special problem with the KJV. If you only want to use the 5e of the KJV that's perfectly fine with me, though I prefer by '95 NASB.

What I am curious about is why do many of the weird internet cults I see are KJO. These people are mostly American, have a random mix of beliefs which usually deny several elements of classical Christian views (non-Trinitarian, call Baptists non-Christian, and any number of esoteric exegesis no one had ever heard of before).

I am not even talking about major sects many Christians would put beyond the pale, like the LDS or Watchtower Society. No, these are either individuals or a tiny group who are affiliated with no church, who indeed feel no need to attend churches because they're all "false churches" according to the author of these poorly designed websites. These people are everywhere online, probably because they have too much free time and like trolling normal people on the internet.

Every time one of these people starts bothering me and telling me to reject Calvinism and embrace a bunch of doctrines never heard of by anyone before today they're always a KJVO person. I am not blaming the KJV for this, it teaches Orthodox Christianity. But some factor seems to attract one man pseudo Christian cult false prophets to the KJV.

I read the KJV, but I have read all of the RSV, and many other versions. Is till read in other versions however I always go back tot he KJV.
I am aware of mistranslations in the KJV, but there are the same in all of the others for many of the original words in the original text are not truly known.
For instance the unicorn is not an ox, though it was discovered long after this error there was no unicorn, it was an ox.
Moses did not have horns emitting from his head when he descended the mountain with the tablets of stone, no, he had rays. The list goes on with so many words knot quite correct to absolutely in error.

So it is with underfstanding not given by the Holy Spirit.

The gospel is understood in all versions, and when guided by the Holy Spirit a person could understand the Word in nursery rhymes, khave faith! If you do not have it, pray for it.

 

[Combanitorics]

The point isn't so much which version you use as how faithfully and realistically you read it. There's a semantic argument and a grammatical quibble possible against every Bible.

 

[Nehemiah6]

But some factor seems to attract one man pseudo Christian cult false prophets to the KJV.

Don't blame a well-respected Bible translation -- the KJV -- for aberrant doctrines. The truth is that the King James Bible (the Authorized Version) is regarded as more authoritative than any modern bible version (and rightly so) by more people than you realize. Even secular Hollywood movies quote from the KJV when required. The KJV is a classic of English literature and has actually molded the English language. Even the Mormons prefer the KJV over any other version, and they have many bizarre doctrines.

As to your preference for the NASB, be advised that it is also one of the modern bible corruptions. From the Preface to the NASB, here is what is presented to unwary readers:
"HEBREW TEXT: In the present translation the latest edition of Rudolf Kittel's BIBLIA HEBRAICA has been employed together with the most recent light from lexicography, cognate languages, and the Dead Sea Scrolls."
GREEK TEXT: Consideration was given to the latest available manuscripts with a view to determining the best Greek text. In most instances the 26th edition [previous editions read, "23rd edition"] of Eberhard Nestle's NOVUM TESTAMENTUM GRAECE was followed."

It just so happens that both these texts are thoroughly corrupt. So enjoy the bad apples.

 

[JStates]

I read the KJV, but I have read all of the RSV, and many other versions. Is till read in other versions however I always go back tot he KJV.
I am aware of mistranslations in the KJV, but there are the same in all of the others for many of the original words in the original text are not truly known.
For instance the unicorn is not an ox, though it was discovered long after this error there was no unicorn, it was an ox.
Moses did not have horns emitting from his head when he descended the mountain with the tablets of stone, no, he had rays. The list goes on with so many words knot quite correct to absolutely in error.

So it is with underfstanding not given by the Holy Spirit.

The gospel is understood in all versions, and when guided by the Holy Spirit a person could understand the Word in nursery rhymes, khave faith! If you do not have it, pray for it.

Great post.

The unicorn was actually a rhinoceros, though, not an ox. One thing that Job mentions is that the unicorn CANNOT be easily domesticated.

The Roman Africanus legions knew about the rhinoceros, and brought accounts of them back to Europe. It was ignorant scribes later on who took the descriptions of a horse-like beast with a horn, mixed it all up with the narwhal's tusk (these were thought to be unicorn horns for a long time) and made their illustrations of the unicorn a horse with a narwhal tusk pasted on.

 

[JStates]

Don't blame a well-respected Bible translation -- the KJV -- for aberrant doctrines. The truth is that the King James Bible (the Authorized Version) is regarded as more authoritative than any modern bible version (and rightly so) by more people than you realize. Even secular Hollywood movies quote from the KJV when required. The KJV is a classic of English literature and has actually molded the English language. Even the Mormons prefer the KJV over any other version, and they have many bizarre doctrines.

As to your preference for the NASB, be advised that it is also one of the modern bible corruptions. From the Preface to the NASB, here is what is presented to unwary readers:
"HEBREW TEXT: In the present translation the latest edition of Rudolf Kittel's BIBLIA HEBRAICA has been employed together with the most recent light from lexicography, cognate languages, and the Dead Sea Scrolls."
GREEK TEXT: Consideration was given to the latest available manuscripts with a view to determining the best Greek text. In most instances the 26th edition [previous editions read, "23rd edition"] of Eberhard Nestle's NOVUM TESTAMENTUM GRAECE was followed."

It just so happens that both these texts are thoroughly corrupt. So enjoy the bad apples.

Yup. The Novum Testamentum Graece is a man-compiled manuscript stitched together from many others. For about the last hundred years, a new edition of the Novum Testamentum Graece has been published approximately every four years. Those behind most modern Bible versions generally adhere to the concept that religion (and I guess the Bible too) is progressive in nature.

I'm not sure I would say that the Biblia Hebraica is "thoroughly corrupt" but then I don't know much about it. It looks like from your post it is another assembled MSS. The historical MSS of the Hebrew OT agree to a remarkable degree though. I think there are only a couple dozen places where they differ, and most of those differences regard things like Lord versus LORD (as rendered in the English).

 

[Amanuensis]

People on the internet that present strange unorthodox doctrine and offbeat interpretations who are also KJV only are just immature people who do what most immature people do, "act like they know what they are talking about when they really don't."

The internet gives every teacher wannabe a platform.

And the thing that social media has always done is give people an "illusion" that they are being listened to.

People like that. People want to feel like others are listening to them and find their opinions "insightful" and "brilliant" and they think that others are reading their posts, thinking "Oh he should write for a living!" or "She should put her thoughts into a daily devotional and sell it!"

But the truth is that no one is really listening. Everyone is thinking about what they want to say in response, and how brilliant their own response is and how everyone agrees that it is so.

And so the illusion and myth feeds the posting addiction.

So that is why really bad KJV only bible teachers are all over the internet.

The bad hermeneutics and the KJV only issue can both be improved if they were to read "How to Read the Bible for All Its Worth" by Gordon Fee and Douglass Stuart, and "How to Choose a Translation for All Its Worth" by the same authors.

 

[Nehemiah6]

I'm not sure I would say that the Biblia Hebraica is "thoroughly corrupt" but then I don't know much about it.

Rudolf Kittel resorted to the corruptions of the OT (the LXX, the Samaritan Pentateuch, Qumran manuscripts, targums, the Mishna, etc) to stitch together his Biblia Hebraica. There is "evidence of substantial rewriting" according to Evidence of Editing published by the Society of Biblical Literature.

 

[JaumeJ]

People on the internet that present strange unorthodox doctrine and offbeat interpretations who are also KJV only are just immature people who do what most immature people do, "act like they know what they are talking about when they really don't."

The internet gives every teacher wannabe a platform.

And the thing that social media has always done is give people an "illusion" that they are being listened to.

People like that. People want to feel like others are listening to them and find their opinions "insightful" and "brilliant" and they think that others are reading their posts, thinking "Oh he should write for a living!" or "She should put her thoughts into a daily devotional and sell it!"

But the truth is that no one is really listening. Everyone is thinking about what they want to say in response, and how brilliant their own response is and how everyone agrees that it is so.

And so the illusion and myth feeds the posting addiction.

So that is why really bad KJV only bible teachers are all over the internet.

The bad hermeneutics and the KJV only issue can both be improved if they were to read "How to Read the Bible for All Its Worth" by Gordon Fee and Douglass Stuart, and "How to Choose a Translation for All Its Worth" by the same authors.

Your expertise is only exceeded by your understanding of others.

God teaches any who truly learn His Word, not print for the written word kills ... Not to sound too intelligent, I believe that statement is declaring the need to learn by the Holy Spirit, for to learn what God teaches will only be so by His Spirit.

Meanwhile, allow all to accept the manner in which the Father teaches each.

 

[JStates]

Rudolf Kittel resorted to the corruptions of the OT (the LXX, the Samaritan Pentateuch, Qumran manuscripts, targums, the Mishna, etc) to stitch together his Biblia Hebraica. There is "evidence of substantial rewriting" according to Evidence of Editing published by the Society of Biblical Literature.

Thanks for that info. This is the huge problem with modern versions. By considering the historically rejected texts, wherever there is a difference in manuscripts, a human editor gets to choose which version to include in their new "bible" version.

Looks like Kittel did the same.

 

[Lanolin]

I think KJV is pretty self explanatory in itself and doesnt really need the extra championing when it already does the job. Anyone can read it and understand that, when read as a whole, there is nothing much to quibble about it.

kjv only sects tend to have some OTHER agenda...usually but not limited to denouncing certain people they believe is the anti-christ (usually whoever is in power at the time) or some sort of distorted timeline regarding biblical events.