Burning the Bible

A church in North Carolina is planning a Bible and book burning on Halloween.  If it's not the King James Version, into the flames it goes.  Any book written by Christian leaders they identify as heretics (Billy Graham, Rick Warren, Bill Hybels, James Dobson, Charles Swindoll and others) are into the bonfire as well.  For good measure they're throwing in CD's considered to be Satan's music, including those by contemporary Christian artists.

Here's a news story about it.  (Thanks Tim Stevens for posting this.)

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4FkbgeR8LKs&feature=player_embedded#at=34[/youtube]

I initially hesitated in even posting about this church because I really don't think they deserve any sort of publicity, but I just can't get over the fact that a church would advocate the burning of Bibles.

The church is doing all of this because it believes the KJV is the only translation inspired by the word of God.  I like what Phil Cooke had to say when writing about this on his blog.  At one point in his career, he was doing a documentary on William Tyndale, the man who translated much of the Bible into modern English.  Cooke writes:

In the preface to that original KJV, the translators had an interesting note. Essentially they humbly said they had done the best job they could with the manuscripts available, but knew it fell short and hoped future translators would do a better job in the future. So I find it rather fascinating that the ORIGINAL TRANSLATORS of the KJV knew future translations would be a good thing, but now this very small group today thinks the KJV is the "only anointed and authorized" version available.  Amazing contradiction.

So what's your take on the Halloween Bible and book burning?

(Don't worry, if you can't make it to the event, they'll come to your house and pick up whatever you need burned.)

Login to comment

Comments (23)

I think it is a thinly veiled publicity stunt. It looks like the pastor hopes to increase his tribe of congregants who are afraid to use the brains God gave them. But it's certainly a new twist on a book burning - who ever thought the Bible could be included in such an exercise?
This is pretty idiotic. Whatever. They are just guilty of a different kind of idolatry than I am. They idolize the English language. Either way, I hope they learn about God's grace but chances are it will be the hard way, like me.

Dang Chris, well said. This is the right response to things like this... I wish I could say I reacted this way!

<><
Wow! To be quite honest, I wouldn't mind if the fire got a little out of control and the building burned down with it. ;-)
Whoa. Can we say extreme?

I don't agree with them at all. Although I do believe KJV to be superior to other versions, I would never create such division so as to organize a book burning.

And as far as the authors go, it is much the same thing. I don't agree with most of them. I in fact have some issues with Billy Graham. But why would I adopt such a secular reaction such as book burning from the world?

Talk about it people. Iron sharpens Iron. Let God light the fires.
some people forget that KJV only gained it's prominance due to the King ordering that a copy was to be bought by every church in the land. There were a number of translations in english before this and translators were prosecuted.
They don’t go far enough. Our group, the Reformed Free-Will Fire-Baptized Baptists believe the latin Vulgate is the only authorized version. The second edition. Ad eundum quo nemo ante iit. And to publicize that fact we will be holding a competing book burning where will be torching Augustine’s Confessions, the Book of Kells, McGuffey’s Reader, Catcher in the Rye, the L volume of the encyclopedia, and Moby Dick. And at our picnic, the chicken will be fried in Crisco, not that socialist canadian oil, Canola.

You’re right Jerod, any publicity is too much publicity. Did you catch that they only had 14 members?
I was not familiar with your group, but it's good to see at least someone else takes the bible seriously. I am sorry to say, however, that even your collective does not go far enough. The only reliable versions of the bible are the original texts. In our church each member is taught Ancient Hebrew, Greek, and Latin. Since even translations are faulty and anything technological can be tampered with we plan 3-4 excursions to Israel and museums where we can read the original texts. This the only way to be sure you are reading God's annointed word. I also agree with a previous poster that it takes a great deal of cognition to read and understand the KJV and unless you are immersed in the language and historical settings you will rarely get anything significant from the reading. (one reason our church members eat only foods prepared in biblical times) However to stop at the KJV is pure laziness you must get to the source languages. In Roman times most Jews spoke both Hebrew and Latin and the religious scholars also spoke Greek. There was good reason for this, these are superior languages. It had nothing to do with being relevant or able to communicate with the majority of people in their world. God used these languages to write his word because they are superior to any other before or after. The fact that Luke used Greek to speak to the Greeks and Latin to the Romans was merely conveinent. The KJV version and every version after has been a travesty to the word of God. Taking the original writing and putting them in style and language people "can understand today" is a joke! It cheapens the very word you claim to love. Any true believer would invest 5-7 years to first learn and understand the language of Jesus' time before ever attempting to read the bible. So for you KJV lovers out there let me encourage and motivate you with a brief Greek lesson. The word hypocrisy comes from the Greek ὑπόκρισις (hypokrisis), which means "play-acting", "acting out", "coward" or "dissembling" This is a great place to start by recognizing where you are.. and that you are not alone there are literally millions of "Christians" who also love their uninspired versions. Think of the hundreds of thousands of Chinese Christians who could be imprisoned or executed for reading their Chinese "translation" of the bible, it is quite sad. Let me summarize with Mark 16:15 "And he said unto them, Go ye into all the world, and preach the gospel to every creature [in the language which I have spoken and if they do not understand, do not change my words, but teach them first this earthly language so they may understand you when you speak my words to them for the Holy Spirit is unable to maintain the integrity of God's word through translation and the acts of men. For though I now speak to you in terms and languages relating to your life and circumstances this will not always be so there will come a time around 1611 when sinners like you will try to make my words relatable to the general masses through translation and then again many years later they will try again. Remember the times I sat with tax collectors, prostitutes, and thieves and spoke to them in Hebrew not English.]"

(The bracketed section of Mark 16:15 was discovered during one of my churches trips to the Northeastern Syrian Museum of Israelite History)

If you have been enlightened through this and would like to learn more about my church, Templum of Verus Reddo, please respond here (we are currently only accepting members who have learned at least two of the Ancient Trinity of Languages, thank you!)
Grrr. Stuff like this frustrates me. It feels like we're shooting ourselves in the foot (Note: subtle Body of Christ reference!). I'll be honest, I prefer the KJV. To me, it makes me think, and I like that, but I understand that it's a version itself. It's like as Christians, we're concerned about the wrong things. Instead of concerning ourselves with OUR relationship with Jesus, we feel the need to tell people why they're wrong. (And yes, I understand the irony in that sentence) I guess that's what helps us in making us feel better about our own faults.

And why am I not surprised that they will be serving BBQ chicken? haha!
Although I love the KJV -- it's familiar and I personally believe that the beauty of its language has yet to be surpassed by another English translation -- I don't know why some people think it's sacred. It's a translation so, in a manner of speaking, it's already a derivation, a corruption.

Slight tangent: One of the TC posts I remember best was about how some people treat The Bible like it's the fourth person of the Godhead. I can't help being fascinated by how the earliest Christians, without a Bible (because they were contemporaries of some of the writers), had most of us beat in terms of their committment.
I find it difficult to believe that people still carry around and actually read the KJC (even in our church). It does not communicate well except to those raised with it. I have read enough about translation debates to know that the KJV only folk are about as rabid and irrational as we come. We believers do such crazy things and we wonder why outsiders often have a hard time taking our message seriously.
I go to a church that is "KJV-only". I am also a deacon of this church. Every Wednesday night I violate our church's bylaws and constitution by not only teaching from, but heavily endorsing, the ESV to my young-adult's class. If word got out that I was doing this, I could be in some serious hot water. Granted, my church is not of the hateful, self-righteous ilk. They are emphatically KJV-only, and will spout the usual inculcation about the KJV being the "preserved Word". But to their honor, if you disagree with them, they will give you a loving, no-harm-done hug.

This presents me with a very difficult dilemma. The KJV is a beautiful and time-tested translation; I own several copies and adore them. However, for 18-25 year olds, so much cogitation is required to get past the language, that little is left to expend on the themes. I love my students and want them to get the most out of their Bibles. I have several students who bring KJVs with them on Wednesday night, and I know, beyond a shadow of a doubt, that they cannot read it with any competency. They are from families that are KJV-only, and they too carry their KJVs with pride. My heart breaks for them; they get so little out of their Bible reading. They love me enough to not rat me out for using the ESV.

Shockingly, what had never occurred to me (until I read Brett Barner's comment) is that the loose thread in the KJV-only argument lies right there in that abbreviation. "KJV". King James VERSION. I call this a "loose thread" because, I feel this is a great place to begin the KJV-only debate. Next time I am approached about the topic I will simply ask, "What does the V in KJV stand for?" After they answer, "Version," I will ask, "Version of what? What does version mean?" I realize this isn't the end-all-be-all-nail-in-the-coffin to the KJV-only argument, but still... it's a way to start the discussion on my terms. I'd also like to mention Tyndale's hope that better "versions" be made someday, but I hate to simply have an obscure blog entry as my source. Anybody have a link to more conclusive website/article that deals with Tyndale's foreword in the original KJV?
I hope the book burning includes trashy novels, dirty magazines and DVDS.

See the latest in:

Promotion

promo 1 promo 2
promo 3 promo 4

Donate Now