So, having access to some of the Sword of the Lord archives, it has become apparent to me the progression from not-KJVO to TR-Only to KJVO.
- Not-KJVO is represented by Dr. John R. Rice's March 30, 1979 article "Some Questions for King James Fans."
- TR-Only is represented by Ev. Gary R. Hudson's March 17, 1989 article "Ruckman's Unscriptural Claims for the K.J.V."
- Full-on KJVO is represented in the position of the Sword today.
The following three statements are in the editor's note at the end of the TR-Only 1989 article:
"The King James Version, in our opinion, is without peer and need fear no competition."
"We cannot agree that one can take the English Bible and correct the Greek from which it was
"And we certainly disagree with Peter Ruckman's statement, ''Mistakes in the AV 1611 are advanced revelation." That is adding to the Word of God, which is strictly forbidden in the Scriptures. If the KJV contains advanced revelation, as Ruckman claims, then where was the inspired Bible before 1611?"
Notice the editor did not say there were NO mistakes. He merely said the KJV is best but it doesn't correct the Greek as "advanced revelation".
They would not be willing today, to admit to ANY mistakes in the KJV.
John R. Rice understood that KJVO promoters are extremists. From his 1979 article:
"Why Cannot Fans and Extremists About the King James Version Be Good Christians Also?
"It is a sad thing that those in some heresy often err greatly inmatters of righteousness also. They write mean letters; they make slanderous charges; they ignorantly jump to conclusions about people; they have suspicions and innuendoes. No, if a man is a good enough Christian to be right on the matter of inspiration, he ought to be a good enough Christian to control his tongue. The Bible says plainly:
'Make no friendship with an angry man; and with a furious man thou shalt not go: Lest thou learn his ways, and get a snare to thy soul."—Prov. 22:24,25.'"
"And we think it is almost blasphemous to say that if God didn' t guarantee every word translated in the King James Version to be correct, then He is "either careless or impotent to keep His Word pure thru the ages." God could have preserved all the original manuscripts, but did not. God is not either "careless or impotent" if He does not do just as some extremist or radical demands."
This understanding of the extremist nature of KJVOism is not Rice's alone. I remember when I first come to my current church. I emailed the pastor a number of questions, one having to do with KJVOism. (He did not know for sure at the time that I was not KJVO.) He let me know that while the church uses the KJV, they are not KJVO. Most striking was statement that "this has been the most divisive issue I have faced in my 17 years as pastor. I don't argue it with anyone anymore."
Extremism and divisiveness go hand in hand. If you attempt to cater to or appease an extremist, a line in the sand will be drawn for you very quickly. And you will be expected to take a side.
The line got drawn for the Sword in the years after Rice's death by the conversion of Hyles and his crowd to KJVO in 1984. The Sword straddled somewhat until going full-on KJVO with the publication of Riplinger's New Age Bible Versions and the death of Curtis Hutson.
Now THEY are extremists also.