Why are Tiny Sectarian Internet Cults Usually KJO?

KarynLouise

Yes, I understand what you mean. In my experience most people who are 'religious' in the social sense tend to be conformist more than anything. They are naturally prone to joining churches but I get the feeling they'd as easily fit into a Buddhist mold if they'd been brought up in one. The people who tend to be Fundamentalist (and I mean hold to radical strictness in matters of faith) aren't people who are naturally 'religious' but people who actually came to the faith consciously and often as a reaction against the world, rather than simply because their parents were members of a church.

ResidentAlien


American "low church" Evangelicals are notoriously anti-intellectual, this derives from a conflict with the mainline churches and seminaries which split off many of the educated into liberal modernist sects while those left in the fundamentalist and Evangelical free churches were mostly people without a lot of education and who resented the betrayel of pointy headed academics in their former denomimations. Exceptions seem to be mostly in certain small but at least intellectually engaged groups such as Gresham Machen's PCA/OPC/Westminster.


Yes, as a Particular Baptist I have plenty of problems with the Caesaro-Papist 'Reformed' Church of England. As I expressed earlier I believe it's mostly an Anglo cultural attachment, as most American Christians don't really know much about English or church history. I think I prefer my Geneva to the KJV, but that's just because I'm a Calvinist.

Amanuensis

I think that's a bit hyperbolic. There is an argument for teaching and reading the KJV, both because it is a reasonably accurate (not perfect) translation which does convey the Gospel of Jesus Christ. It's also a part of the history of the English language and culture and should be preserved. Modern people need to stop being so illiterate and ignorant of cultural history, especially Americans. That being said since most people don't understand the grammar and vocabulary employed in parts of the KJV it is worthwhile to keep in mind your audience and choose an accurate translation that they can parse. I like the NASB, but many people find it awkward. My personal favorite New Testament for reading is Richmond Lattimore, but it has no intratextual chapter/verse markers. The NKJV seems alright.

I will use the KJV when my sources tell me it is a better translation on a verse but if not I will use the NIV, or another faithful modern English dynamic equivalent. A word for word equivalent does not exist. Maybe an Interlinear would be as close to a word for word as you can get and that would not effectively communicate which is the goal.

I always keep in mind that my main objective is to faithfully communicate what the author intended to communicate in its original context. And I try to be always sensitive to things that would distract from effective communications.

If using archaic words will distract then I will use modern English. I dress so as not distract from the message. With me that is a suit. Suits still help people take you more serious. I use my hands so as not to distract, such as not scratching my head. You don't want people wondering if you have dandruff or thinking about what medication shampoo they want to suggest to you after the service, you want them to be paying attention to what you are speaking about. Everything I do with body language and speech is focused on communicating effectively so that they may understand the Word of God being preached and respond to it. If I were to talk to a person on the street about what the bible says and point to scriptures I would want to use an NIV. I want them to understand and not be wondering why I am adding "eth" to all my words. LOL. Love will lead me to make sure I am communicating and not being legalistic about the KJV only rule some people seem to be stuck on.

In a sense the Word of God is Jesus Christ and Christ is the gospel, and this is what is divinely preserved for the believer in the Bible, the KJV obsession with specific wording is Bibliolatrous at points. Christ is the Word and the content of the Gospel, the actual printed book is merely a method. Without Christ on our hearts it's of no use at all.

...the KJV obsession with specific wording is Bibliolatrous at points.