Has King James onlyism been rejected?

Posted by Glynn Brown in Facebook's Pentecostal Theology Group View the Original Post

Concerning the AOG,COG,denominations,has king james onlyism been rejected?

John Kissinger [01/22/2016 11:23 AM]
probably long time ago Glynn most I hear preach from NKJV or NIV

Eric Shonebarger [01/22/2016 11:24 AM]
NLT is getting popularity as well (cog pastor)

John Kissinger [01/22/2016 11:26 AM]
Eric we had a good NTL discussion last year, but as many CoG and AG preachers said: NLT good for devotion – not so good for preaching http://www.pentecostaltheology.com/has-anyone-used-the-nlt-version/

Glynn Brown [01/22/2016 11:30 AM]
I’m mainly referring to the upper levels of these denominations.

Tim Renneberg [01/22/2016 11:47 AM]
As an official position, I don’t think it’s been rejected by the AG. That being said, I don’t think any of the AG academics hold a KJVO position

Jimmy Humphrey [01/22/2016 11:55 AM]
Most upper levels of leadership in these denominations have formal theological education. Which means they know better than to be into KJV only-ism. It’s simply a intellectually backward perspective.

Carl Murphy [01/22/2016 12:15 PM]
I favor the ESV

Alan N Carla Smith [01/22/2016 12:30 PM]
have any of you used, tried or heard of the Tree of Life Version – TLV?

Josh Claxton [01/22/2016 12:38 PM]
All the COG churches around where I live are KJV only… That’s what I was brought up to use, the old school holiness..

Brody Pope [01/22/2016 12:39 PM]
I’m more of a KJV type of guy.

Mike Evans [01/22/2016 12:47 PM]
I don’t know why there is an argument. The best version is one that is accurate and that a person will read. I prefer KJV and it is still the most purchased one today. I read many different versions, but I love my KJV.

John Conger [01/22/2016 1:25 PM]
Differs from church to church. Ad a denomination the cog is not kjvo

Emery Jay Vintes [01/22/2016 1:31 PM]
And all your getting get understanding

John Conger [01/22/2016 1:37 PM]
I find anyone who doesn’t use the 1611 but peaches kjvo humorous. …and annoying

Steve Webb [01/22/2016 1:40 PM]
We can only hope it continues to fade…

John Kissinger [01/22/2016 1:41 PM]
I strongly doubt that ANY KJV-only member of this group knows what John 3:16 says in the original 1611 edition

John Conger [01/22/2016 1:48 PM]
No doubt. Except for that crazy guy Anderson.

Glynn Brown [01/22/2016 1:49 PM]

John Kissinger [01/22/2016 1:49 PM]
even he does not call the Son, Sonne…

John Conger [01/22/2016 2:08 PM]
No doubt

Thomas Edward [01/22/2016 3:20 PM]
CoG of Anderson, IN and CoG of Cleveland, TN are separate denominations. I’m in the CoG of Cleveland, TN and our state overseer uses The Message from time to time.

Thomas Edward [01/22/2016 3:24 PM]
I usually preach from NKJV because it is fairly easy to follow along with for those using many of the common translations.

Greg Grant [01/22/2016 3:56 PM]
NRSV snd, NIV for study.

John Conger [01/22/2016 3:57 PM]
I agree. I wouldn’t buy the message at a garage sale

1 Comment

  • Reply April 27, 2016

    Britt Williams

    The only ground the KJV is attacked on is evidential ground. The evidential arguments of the non-KJV camp are self-defeating and exalt empiricism, rather than faith. Granted, I admit I believe the KJVO evidential arguments, but I do so because I am presuppositionally committed to the KJV. I also concede I cannot really prove (only cite) the evidence that supports the KJV. Nonetheless, the real root problem with the translation issue is faith. Whatever any of us claim to know about the Bible is by faith and faith alone. No one can discern the Scriptures independently from God’s Spirit. It is not a matter of intellect, but of Spirit.

    Presuppositionally, I admit I can only prove…

    1. The arguments used by Bible-agnostics are solely based on faith and are woefully self-defeating.

    2. It is reasonable to believe there is a perfect Bible.

    3. We must trust God to lead us to it.

    I believe it to be the KJV and I refuse to listen to any accusation against it.

    The full defense can be found here, if you haven’t already read it…

    http://www.facebook.com/note.php?note_id=364440648034

    I am not against empiricism per se, but simply assert that empiricism as an epistemological foundation is anything but Christian and must never be trusted to define our reality. We allow God’s Word to measure ALL THINGS, not vice-versa.

Leave a Reply

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.