FBFI and the KJV

How foolish that this even needs to be addressed in this fashion. Verily, I am grateful I don’t have to tap-dance like this at my church. There is no institutional history of KJVO in my congregation.

David Shumate is presently working on a clarifying statement on reasons for using the KJV that would be outside the realm of orthodoxy and biblical principle regarding how to interact with those that differ.

If my understanding is correct, I think that the forthcoming statement will not be well-received by the KJV-only crowd. If that’s correct, good for the FBFI.

Tyler, I too am thankful that my church doesn’t have a history of KJV-onlyism (on any level). However, my church and its associations are not perfect, have blind spots, and carry past baggage. Shepherding to better, more mature, or even correct positions requires charity and humility and, often, time.

Sometimes charity means that things don’t move as quickly as outsiders wish. Considering that the FBFI is dealing with the convoluted spiderweb of bad teaching about translation issues that continues to plague segments of fundamentalism, I think we outsiders should be encouraged by their charity even if that charity comes at the expense of speed and directness. More souls are involved than the pastors and teachers who dogmatically spread the bad and even false teaching of KJV-onlyism. Many faithful and well-meaning brothers and sisters in Christ would be hurt and potentially pushed further into the arms of bad and false teaching if the FBFI were to come out swinging too hard.

From the article: “David Shumate is presently working on a clarifying statement on reasons for using the KJV that would be outside the realm of orthodoxy and biblical principle.”

Does the FBFI not see this as another PR disaster waiting to happen with those who have historically been the core constituency of the fellowship? Having Mark Ward (a Gospel Coalition contributor) to speak at the annual meeting and then writing such a “clarifying statement” are both needlessly divisive actions on the part of the FBFI.

You wrote:

Does the FBFI not see this as another PR disaster waiting to happen with those who have historically been the core constituency of the fellowship? Having Mark Ward (a Gospel Coalition contributor) to speak at the annual meeting and then writing such a “clarifying statement” are both needlessly divisive actions on the part of the FBFI.

We don’t know what that clarifying statement is going to say. As you alluded to, many of the past core constituency of the FBFI are sympathetic to the KJV-only position, at the least. The FBFI is in a tricky position, and I believe that “our side” taking shots at them as they work through this is counterproductive. At the least, we should wait until this forthcoming statement comes out before we take aim at the FBFI.

Ward’s book is a model of charity and clarity. I did a 90 minute video interview with him that posted on SI earlier this year. I also know change takes time. My comments were simply an expression of my own gratitude that KJVO is one problem I’ve left far behind me in my own ministry context. As an outsider to the FBFI, I understand they have to straddle the fence for their varied constituency, but I’m frustrated the tap-dancing still needs to happen. We should be past this by now.

Yes, Tyler, we should be long past this. But the decisions were made not to rock the boat and to preserve “unity”, which allowed the cancerous teaching to quietly spread and take further root.

The FBFI needs to amputate that teaching out.

Unless you’ve read the forthcoming statement, how can you have such epistemic confidence about what “decisions were made?”

If you had told me yesterday that I would’ve started Monday by defending the FBFI, I may not have gotten out of bed :)

@Jay: They say the best time to plant a tree is 20 years ago. The second-best time is now.

It would have been nice to have this in the rearview mirror twenty-years ago; let’s be glad for what might be done now. Better late than never.

Mark Ward’s balanced and clear presentation at the FBFI meeting was excellent as is his book. While I’m looking forward to the FBFI’s clarification of its position, I’m somewhat sorry that Mark’s presentation has put them on the defensive. As I see it one of the things that must be addressed in an edict or whatever from the FBFI hierarchy is a definition of what they consider KJVO.

They knew what they were doing when they invited Ward to speak on the topic. I am grateful they invited him anyway. I’m sure they knew this was coming.

The FBFI wrote:

We do not make the use of a particular translation a test of fellowship and we do not think it should be. The more important question is not what translation you use, but why you use it. It is increasingly clear that we need to talk more about this, not less. David Shumate is presently working on a clarifying statement on reasons for using the KJV that would be outside the realm of orthodoxy and biblical principle regarding how to interact with those that differ.

I think I’ll pray for David, and perhaps find and send him a surplus ballistic vest before his article posts. He’ll need it.