A Modern Bible Study - Let's lighten it up a bit!

Stefan; You will note that in YOUR definition, the term is considered OFFENSIVE. I think you owe someone an apology. Shame on you and everyone else here using the term in reference to ANYONE.
You will also note that I am not in the wrong here. Paul set the principle when he rebuked Peter in public because he was to be blamed for his hypocrisy. How dare anyone name the name of our Saviour and at the same time hurl insults to a brother in Christ, whether he be present or not to hear it?
Jim

 

Stefan; You will note that in YOUR definition, the term is considered OFFENSIVE. I think you owe someone an apology. Shame on you and everyone else here using the term in reference to ANYONE.
You will also note that I am not in the wrong here. Paul set the principle when he rebuked Peter in public because he was to be blamed for his hypocrisy. How dare anyone name the name of our Saviour and at the same time hurl insults to a brother in Christ, whether he be present or not to hear it?
Jim </font>[/QUOTE]I owe no one an apology. I never called anyone a name. I was merely correcting what you said. Go2church most likely did not mean what you said he meant; he most likely meant the primary definition I gave. I'm not saying it excuses him, but I wanted to clarify it.

 

"but whosoever shall say, Thou fool, shall be in danger of hell fire."
Slice it anyway you guys want to. YOU know it is wrong, so quit it.
Jim

 

While I disagree with Jim's stand in the versions, I do agree that there is no cause for name calling.

Attack issues and ideas, NOT individuals.

 

Flaunting your "education" will not carry any weight with me...

Problem is,your biased(programmed) opinion of the Bible believer is just that--an opinion(much like your analogy of opinions in a different theread)-lacking merit..

 

KJVOs flaunting their ignorance
will not carry any weight with me.

At least the educated persons had to put
a bit of work into their education. One
can be ignorant without lifting a finger.

 

Actually, it was AVBunyan who set the agenda for the name calling during this thread (Not that I am relinquishing responsibility for my part, I'm not) with his parody of "Elder Dim Whit" in the opening post.

HankD

 

Wherever it started - can we just move beyond the name calling?

It is truly demeaning for both sides.

 

AA, It was not a flaunting of his education, he was asked a question concerning a conclusion he had come to and the professor part was a necessary element in the response.

HankD

 

Yes sir! oops, I mean yes.

HankD

 

A_A:You didn't.But,the WAY you presented the Bible believer is consistant with the stereotype of Southeners:Backwards,and ignorant!!

Nothing could be further from the truth!!![/i]

1.) Never mentioned any state, region, race, or culture.

2.)I didn't stereotype all the Bible believers...just one branch.

 

Go2church:Ruckman is an idiot I say it on this board and would say so to his face. He has done more harm then good...by a long shot.

I WILL concede he has some SCHOLARSHIP, however. BUT...Scholarship doesn't automatically equal COMMON SENSE. For example, I have a certain knowledge of chemistry which I used in making steel, which I could also use to make a powerful incendiary device from common substances. In other words, I can use this knowledge for good or evil. And it's plain to see the use Ruckman makes of HIS knowledge. It sure isn't WISDOM, which is the PRACTICAL APPLICATION AND PROPER USE of knowledge.

 

A_A:Problem is,your biased(programmed) opinion of the Bible believer is just that--an opinion(much like your analogy of opinions in a different theread)-lacking merit..


Pot calling kettle black!

YOUR bias in referring to KJVOs as "Bible Believers" in the sense that you're saying ONLY KJVOs are Bible believers is quite obvious and quite incorrect.

 

--------------------------------------------------

I WILL concede he has some SCHOLARSHIP, however. BUT...Scholarship doesn't automatically equal COMMON SENSE. For example, I have a certain knowledge of chemistry which I used in making steel, which I could also use to make a powerful incendiary device from common substances. In other words, I can use this knowledge for good or evil. And it's plain to see the use Ruckman makes of HIS knowledge. It sure isn't WISDOM, which is the PRACTICAL APPLICATION AND PROPER USE of knowledge

--------------------------------------------------

Scholarship should be weighed by faith. Ruckman at least has faith in the infallible word of God. Metzger however, along with most everyone before and after him did not. Faith is the most important issue regarding scholarship concerning this issue. The mv side is sadly lacking in this area.

I suppose it depends upon what one considers good, and what one considers evil. In the last days we are warned that many will call evil good, and good evil. Faith in God's word of truth is good (John 5:38-40). Doubt in God's word is evil(Gen.3:1).

Do you also have the Readers Digest version Metzger produced of the Bible, along with the plethora of other versions you use? I wouldn't be surprised if you did.


love in Jesus Christ our Lord and Saviour,
michelle

 

How about those who say “mean” translations are the Word of God?
What those who say a variety of translations are profitable and good
And even necessary along with marginal notes for finding out the “sense” of the Scriptures

two of their favorites being the Latin Vulgate and the Apocrypha.

 

Flaunting your "education" will not carry any weight with me...

Problem is,your biased(programmed) opinion of the Bible believer is just that--an opinion(much like your analogy of opinions in a different theread)-lacking merit.. </font>[/QUOTE]I agree, you are using your "education" to say that you are the final authority and that mere mortals like us cannot possibly know what we are talking about. Its funny that you know what you are talking about,yet anybody that disagrees with you that has an equevilant number of degrees doesnt.

 

Would you say this to his face? I bet you wouldnt because he has consistently beat all and everyone that argues with him on the KJV issue and has reduced them to name calling to try to "debate" him. I do not know if I agree with him on everything but on the Bible he knows what he is talking about.

 

Some of you -Granny, A-A, and others like to portray the South as being KJVO well in a city in SC Pickens to be exact there are 3 900+ SBC churches and none of them use the KJV the SBC is the largest by far church in the south and almost none use the KJV I know some do but 75% don't. Oh the town of Pickens has about 40,000 people in it. 90% are baptist in this town 60% are SBC so most of the south is leaving KJVO &lt;snipped&gt;.

1cross+3nails=4given

[ August 24, 2004, 07:57 PM: Message edited by: Dr. Bob ]

 

I know of no SBC churches in my area that use the kjBible. We are the only Baptists who do. Yes, there is definitely a falling-away. You can see it in their dress, their music, their talk and their walk. No one fears God anymore.

Granny~boldly standing for Truth, at all cost.

 

Or wow could it be that you are just decieved. Or stuck in man made rules and regulations based on a version that uses words that leave anyone today scratching their heads. Their music 'gasp' they might actually listen to CHR and accept differant kinds of music. Boy are they going to hell.Their walk 'gasp' I guess they walk like the world (whatever that means) and man I guess the young people wear baggy clothing. Get over it 'granny &lt;snipped&gt;

[ August 24, 2004, 07:58 PM: Message edited by: Dr. Bob ]