Have we REALLY run the KJVOs off?

Discussion in '2005 Archive' started by robycop3, Jan 18, 2005.

  1. robycop3

    robycop3
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Jul 31, 2000
    Messages:
    7,573
    Likes Received:
    10
    I've noticed very little response from the KJVO side here lately, but I HAVE noticed in other places that some KJVOs have accused us "buncha liberal Baptists" of kicking them off this board.

    Did anyone run them off? OR...Did they voluntarily leave when their myth was proven false and blown outta the water right before their eyes?

    I know the moderators have removed a few freakazoids, trolls, & spammers who refused to abide by the very fair rules of the board, but otherwise, I have never seen anyone removed for standing up for his/her beliefs no matter how wrong they may be.

    The continued silence from the KJVOs is very telling. Their silence is from LACK OF EVIDENCE.

    It mystifies me as to why a seemingly-intelligent person would continue to believe a proven-false doctrine about the most important literature on earth...GOD'S WORD...but it's their right to believe it if they choose, same as it's our right to attack their doctrine because we know it's false. And again...I know of NO ONE being kicked off this board for defending the KJVO myth in the proper manner

    The silence of the defenders of Dr. Ruckman is deafening...
     
  2. chipsgirl

    chipsgirl
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Dec 8, 2004
    Messages:
    2,832
    Likes Received:
    0
    maybe they got tired of the fight and just went where people agree with them
     
  3. James_Newman

    James_Newman
    Expand Collapse
    Banned

    Joined:
    Aug 27, 2004
    Messages:
    5,013
    Likes Received:
    0
    I'm still here
     
  4. David J

    David J
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Apr 21, 2004
    Messages:
    796
    Likes Received:
    0
    I've noticed very little response from the KJVO side here lately, but I HAVE noticed in other places that some KJVOs have accused us "buncha liberal Baptists" of kicking them off this board

    I guess they must go and lick their wounds but then again birds of a feather flock together. Within their own camp they don’t fight well documented historical evidence. They ignore this and embrace very loose works by other KJVOist that contradict well known facts.

    The main problem for KJVOist today is how easily evidence/info can be found via the internet. Years ago KJVOist could say literally anything (refer to the Ruckman thread) and it was very hard to research their claims without searching for hard to find books and spending a good bit of cash.

    More and more I see many KJVOist cover there ears refusing to hear the truth and blinded themselves within the KJVO myth so that they can not see the facts. When asked for scripture to support KJVOism the worse of the bunch start name calling and slandering. The moderate KJVOist may try to answer the question with a question simply to avoid answering question. It’s very frustrating for KJVOist to answer our questions simply because they have no answers without making the KJV that they hold dear suspect to the same type of suspicion that they accuse modern bibles of doing.

    Now the AV1611 is free for all to read. With E-Sword anyone can simply compare the 1611 to the 1769 KJV and see that the KJVO claims about "minor" changes is false. The Message to the Reader can be found on the net. The 1611 has been reprinted. The Geneva Bible can be read for free, etc... It's getting harder and harder for KJVOist to hide behind their myths and distortions simply because today the "plow boy" can research the facts for himself and not depend on the KJVO leadership to tell him what to believe.

    What I’m about to say is not an attack or smear on anyone here past or present. When I was a KJVO, I was a die hard KJVOist. I followed all the main stream KJVO ideas from various sources and groups ranging from Cloud to Ruckman’s people. My former pastor taught the advanced revelations to the point that even the italic words are inspired. The day that I read the Message to the Reader and studied the AV1611 was the day that I started questioning my KJVOism. As a rational honest man seeking the facts I researched the issue for about a year. I could not in good faith remain a KJVO simply because KJVOism is nothing but double standards, myths, and all out distortions of the facts. I simply don’t see how any honest person can remain KJVO when presented with the facts. Now this is not saying that one can not be KJV preferred but to be KJVO is pure dishonesty simply because KJVOism is dishonest.

    Yes, I know it’s hard to drop KJVOism. I fought it for about a year. I fought what I was taught, pride, and rebelled against the evidence. I have never looked back since I left KJVOism. I spend a lot of time now trying to help those who are caught up in the KJVO myth.

    The fact is that KJVOism was built upon the ideas of a SDA, promoted by two dishonest Baptist preachers who stole the work of this SDA, and the myth’s best defense was perfected by a man that has visions of a 10 foot tall black lipped anti-christ. Gasp! And they call me a liberal?
     
  5. GrannyGumbo

    GrannyGumbo
    Expand Collapse
    <img src ="/Granny.gif">

    Joined:
    Apr 15, 2002
    Messages:
    11,414
    Likes Received:
    0
    I'm still here too, 'til someone else comes along who needs a computer more than I do...my first one went to some young people who needed to email their missionary family overseas...the second one went to my pastor/son'n'law...then &lt;personal reference deleted&gt; sent me this one on a Friday eve & by Monday morn, she was banned. I sure miss her.

    [ January 19, 2005, 12:45 AM: Message edited by: C4K ]
     
  6. Scott J

    Scott J
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Apr 25, 2001
    Messages:
    8,462
    Likes Received:
    0
    It has been my experience that most KJVO's will not remain where rules are enforced to ensure civil debate. Which is one of the reasons I only debate this issue here right now. I don't want to be in an discussion where believers openly question each other's salvation based on their Bible version and where people are called liars for no good reason.

    Most KJVO's seem to think that anyone who is not KJVO is a Bible hater and deserves whatever condemnation a "Bible believer" wants to dish out... Of course this is a one way street. Characteristically, they will play the victim when cornered or confronted.
     
  7. Lacy Evans

    Lacy Evans
    Expand Collapse
    Banned

    Joined:
    Mar 13, 2003
    Messages:
    2,364
    Likes Received:
    0
    I lurk around and wait for something interesting to come up. Watching you guys kick dead straw horses is not interesting. I would not break fellowship with any of you over the KJVO issue. And I've pretty much said my peace about it a million times. I'm sure there are probably others who feel the same.

    Love Lacy
     
  8. Johnv

    Johnv
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Oct 24, 2001
    Messages:
    21,321
    Likes Received:
    0

    That's amusing, especially considering that it is the KJVO position that is a liberal position.
    Perhaps the consistent requests for scriptural support ran them off.
    And I'm still waiting for the answer to my question:

    Please provide scriptural support for single translation onlyism. This is my 52nd request.

    Requesting scriptural support for a doctrinal position is anything but a dead straw horse.

    That's encouraging to hear. I don't think most people would break fellowship with anyone else over, in the the big scheme of things, a trivial issue such as the translation issue.
     
  9. Gregory Perry Sr.

    Gregory Perry Sr.
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Dec 9, 2004
    Messages:
    1,993
    Likes Received:
    0
    [​IMG] I'm still here too.Ya'll don't get so satisfied with yourselves.I just made the choice not to post cause the argument will NOT be resolved.For the record...I still believe the evidence I have seen,read,and learned in support of the KJV.ALSO FOR THE RECORD...I DON'T BELIEVE the evidence against it that you repeatedly present.It is that simple.I'll also say I'm NOT an extremist,a "Ruckmanite",Hylesite" or anything else...I just believe that the KJV IS the translation that God has providentially preserved and protected for the english speaking world of our day until the Lord comes back.I'm gonna stay there...ya'll can do what you wish.....and I'll NOT argue about it.It's a waste of time for me.I'm a real Fundamentalist of the "old-time" persuasion and as far as I can tell there is FAR more ecumenicism and ecclesiastical compromise going on out there that can be easily associated with this proliferation of modern translations.It saddens me that so many are being turned aside from God's very narrow way.It would be hard(but I agree not impossible)to associate much of this compromise with good solid hard preaching from that venerable old KJV....ANY EDITION of it.God STILL HAS HIS HAND ON IT and always will.JMO...and thus stated I will once again withdraw to my corner.Ya'll have a nice day. :D [​IMG]

    God Bless Ya'll.....Greg Sr. [​IMG]
     
  10. Scott J

    Scott J
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Apr 25, 2001
    Messages:
    8,462
    Likes Received:
    0
    The real "old time" fundamentalists were not KJVO. In fact, many favored the ASV and used it to refute real liberalism about 100 years ago.

    BTW, if you are honest you will take a close look at KJVO's before you start casting stones at those who use MV's. Legalism and various heretical doctrinal positions are building up on the KJVO foundation... that are every bit as dangerous as "ecumenism and ecclesiastical compromise".
     
  11. HankD

    HankD
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 14, 2001
    Messages:
    15,133
    Likes Received:
    320
    AHA! So God does approves of Bibles that are different!

    HankD
     
  12. Trotter

    Trotter
    Expand Collapse
    <img src =/6412.jpg>

    Joined:
    Jun 29, 2003
    Messages:
    4,815
    Likes Received:
    0
    I, for one, have never doubted it.

    When men are big enough to tell God what He will or won't do, then God is not God.

    God was active prior to 1611, and I'm pretty sure He didn't hang up His work boots thereafter.

    So long as the language of men continues to grow and change, there will be a need for new trasnlations of God's word. And I am thenkful for each and every different translation that I have the privilege of owning and using.

    In Christ,
    Trotter
     
  13. Pastor_Bob

    Pastor_Bob
    Expand Collapse
    Administrator
    Administrator

    Joined:
    Jul 15, 2002
    Messages:
    3,461
    Likes Received:
    45
    "I have often repented speaking, but never of holding my tongue." Xenocrates (396-315 B.C.), Greek philosopher. Quoted by Valerius Maximus in: Annals, bk. 7, ch. 2, sct. 7.

    I believe that your assertion that silence proves a "lack of evidence" is a bit premature. For some, that very well may be the case. For others, silence is simply a result of not wishing to answer the same questions time and again.

    The red herring of "What was the Word of God before 1611?" has been beat to death. The red herring of "Which KJV is the Word of God?" has been around the block several times as well.

    I like what the English poet William Blake(1757-1827) said: "When I tell any truth it is not for the sake of convincing those who do not know it, but for the sake of defending those who do."
     
  14. HankD

    HankD
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 14, 2001
    Messages:
    15,133
    Likes Received:
    320
    So has "things which are different are not the same".

    HankD
     
  15. David J

    David J
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Apr 21, 2004
    Messages:
    796
    Likes Received:
    0
    Well then Pastor Bob answer the questions....

    I have yet to see these answers so please enlighten me. Remember that I used to be a KJVO. Don't you think that if there was a true answer that I would still be KJVO? Come on now and give me the scripture that supports the KJVO doctrine, the scripture that tells me which KJV, the scripture that tells me that it's ok to change the "preserved" word as found in the KJV: I'm referring to the many changes from 1611-1873, and tell me why God would not chose the Geneva Bible that was produced by men who are closer to us Baptist over one produced by the RCC cousin church. So what will it be Bob? Silence?

    In this case silence = frustrations in that KJVOist can not answer without creating a huge problem for the KJVO myth.

    You can quote poets, philosophers, etc... all day but that does not excuse the fact that you have no SCRIPTURE to support the KJVO myth! Sorry but uplifting a man made tradition to the state of scripture will not work. We are not RC's.....

    End the KJVO debate and provide the scripture! End the issue now! Go ahead I'm waiting... I have been waiting for years with no answer. Ever big name KJVO that I have e-mailed has yet to answer these questions. Will you be the first one to share the big KJVO secret scripture that supports KJVOism. I've read the KJV and somehow I must have missed it. I even looked in the real AV1611 but all I found was the Apocrypha and no KJVO support.

    Sorry if this sounds a bit harsh, it was not intended that way.

    Dave
     
  16. Ransom

    Ransom
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Oct 3, 2000
    Messages:
    4,132
    Likes Received:
    0
    Give 'em time, and they'll be back. Either they have very short memories, or they think the rest of us do. Expect a new round of
    </font>
    • the NIV confuses Jesus and Satan</font>
    • the NIV denies the blood</font>
    • the NIV denies the virgin birth</font>
    • the NIV is published by the same people as the Satanic Bible</font>
    • Westcott and Hort contacted the dead</font>
    in a few weeks . . .
     
  17. Amity

    Amity
    Expand Collapse
    Guest

    no i just think a lot of people on this board are too hateful. kjo or not.
     
  18. kjv34

    kjv34
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Dec 23, 2004
    Messages:
    18
    Likes Received:
    0
    I just joined Baptistboard a few weeks ago, I'm KJVO and from what I've seen of the other versions
    verses changed verses missing ( very important Verses) some changed so badly they have a different meaning
    I don't want to argue over the issue but just go and get a list of verses that's missing you can find them online if I find a site I will post it for you. why would I want half a Bible, or a distorted one such as the NIV RSV and many others
     
  19. Ed Edwards

    Ed Edwards
    Expand Collapse
    <img src=/Ed.gif>

    Joined:
    Aug 20, 2002
    Messages:
    15,715
    Likes Received:
    0
    KJV34: "why would I want half a Bible, or a distorted one such as the NIV RSV and many others "

    Because it is accurately translated
    from a viable source.

    Revelation 22:18 (HCSB = Holman Christian Standard Bible)

    I testify to everyone who hears
    the prophetic words of this book:
    If anyone adds to them,
    God will add to him the plagues
    that are written in this book.

    Of course, if you make the logical error
    of assuming one book is right
    and all the rest is wrong; then you can
    prove that one bookis right and all
    the rest are wrong.
     
  20. rsr

    rsr
    Expand Collapse
    <b> 7,000 posts club</b>
    Administrator

    Joined:
    Dec 11, 2001
    Messages:
    10,073
    Likes Received:
    101
    kjv34 said:

    "I don't want to argue over the issue but just go and get a list of verses that's missing you can find them online if I find a site I will post it for you. why would I want half a Bible, or a distorted one such as the NIV RSV and many others ... "

    No offense, but why is it that folks who "don't want to argue" then go on to make such charges against the MVs and not expect a reply?
     

Share This Page

Loading...