[Manny Rodriguez]

2.) KJVO is derived from a 1930 book, "Our Authorized Bible Vindicated", by 7TH DAY ADVENTIST official Dr. Benjamin Wilkinson. And W wasn't trying to start a new doctrine; he was writing in response to an internal squabble within the SDA cult. Several authors (Ray, Ruckman, Fuller, to name a few) copied from that book, and, having better media tools than W had in 1930, were able to sell enough boox to start a new doctrine, which you've inherited.

Absolutely false! The position that Dr. Benjamin Wilkinson espoused was being promoted well before his writings. For example, Dr. Thomas Cassidy has an excellent article in which he reveals a source of an early Fundamentalist named Dr. W.B.Riley who was complaining about a crowd in his day that were standing for the “inerrancy of the King James Bible”. Sound familiar? I’ll let Dr. Cassidy’s information speak for itself:

From Textual Criticism: Fact of Fiction by Thomas Cassidy

W. B. Riley stated in his book "The Menace of Modernism" (New York: Christian Alliance, 1917), the Modernist believes the Bible's "inspiration exists only in its ability to inspire...its interpretation is a matter of mental conscience." Dr. Riley goes on to say there were a group of men whom he describes as the "old conception," who believed the Authorized Version or King James Bible (hereafter AV) was inerrant. He states on page 11, "On this point we are inclined to think that, even unto comparatively recent years, such a theory has been entertained." He then ascribes this belief to ignorance, and says, "I think it would be accepted without fear of successful controversy that such fogies in Biblical knowledge are few, and their funerals are nigh at hand." Actually there are quite a few of us, and I for one am feeling just fine, thank you. Dr. Riley then erroneously states the AV inerrancy position by saying on page 13, "To claim, therefore, inerrancy for the King James Version...is to claim inerrancy for men who never professed it for themselves..." No one, that I am aware of, is claiming inerrancy for men, but only for the words of God. This position is, I believe, a straw man, attempting to ascribe to us something we do not believe, and then condemn us for believing what they claim we believe….

So then, it seems clear to me that Dr. Riley believed there were still a few of the "old conception" men in his day that still believed in an inerrant AV, that they were mostly old men, and were soon to pass away. If these men were old men when Riley wrote his book, they must have dated to at least the latter part of the 19th century. Over one hundred years ago, a group of "old conception" men existed who still believed in the inerrancy of the AV. This appears to indicate the "King James Only" position is not of recent origin.
Thus we can see, in Riley's day, a group of men still existed who believed, "(1) the Bible was finished in heaven and handed down, (2) the King James Version was absolutely inerrant, and (3) its literal acceptance was alone correct." (Page nine of Riley's book as quoted by Dr. George W. Dollar in his book "History of Fundamentalism in America", Page 114) We can easily see that W. B. Riley (1861 - 1947), understood this group of men to believe exactly as the "King James Only" crowd does today, and believed it long before any of the contemporary antagonists were born! The challenge of one scoffer to "Name one person who believed in the inspiration or inerrancy of the King James Version prior to 1950 and I'll send you $1000", has just been answered (please send the money to me at the address in the front of this book!).”

Notice that Dr. Riley’s complaint against those claiming inerrancy for the AV was published in his book in 1917! His information indicates that there was crowd of “the old conception” that espoused this “KJVOnly” position in the late 1800s. This is INDISPUTABLE evidence that the position that KJV defenders possess DID NOT originate with a 7th Day Adventist, much to our opponents disappointment I’m sure.

Besides, I’m not so sure if our opponents really want to compare whose position is more associated with the 7th Day Aventists because if we really wanted to play that “guilt-by-association” game, the truth is that the general position of the 7th Day Adventists today concerning Bible texts is the same as the Critical Text crowd. Benjamin Wilkinson’s position was not the norm amongst his peers.